FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC U IT DE CEMB ER 13, 2005 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NOT P UB L I S H] I N TH E U N I TED STA TES C O U R T O F A PPEA LS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 13195 N on - A r gu m e n t C al e n d ar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 92 -003 14 -C R -O D E -1 U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s I N O C E N T E C A P O T E , a .k .a . T o n y C ap o te , a .k .a . T o n y B r o w n , a .k .a . A n th o n y B r o w n , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A p p ealfr om th e U n i te d S tate s D i st ri ct C ou rt f o r t h e N o r t h e r n D is t r ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( D e c e m b e r 13, 2005) B efo re C A R N E S , P R Y O R a n d F A Y , C i rcu i t J u d g es. P E R C U R I A M:The money and jewe lry

were seized pursua

nt to a search wa

rra nt and, in addition to the 1 money and jewe lry, the g overnment seized 10 kilograms of cocaine, leadingto an indictment for possession with the intent to dis tribute coc aine. A jur y convicted Ca

pote, and hewas subsequently

sentenc ed to life imprisonment. 2 Inocent e C apot e, a f

eder al pri soner procee di ng pro se, appeal s the di stri ct court ’ s deni al of hi s m ot i on for r eturn o f property und erF eder al R ul e of C ri m i nal P r oc e dur e 41( g) , w hi c h w a s c ons true d a s am ot i on t o s e ta s i de f or f e i tur e unde r18 U . S . C . § 983( e ) . O n appe a l he a r gue s tha t( 1) the di s tr i c tc our te rr e d by f i ndi ng tha thi s m ot i on w a s t i m e - ba rr e d; ( 2) he w a s e nt i t l e d t o e qui t abl e t ol l i ng; a nd ( 3) the appl i ca t i on of § 9 83 , enac t ed af t erthe forf

ei ture procee di ng s i n thi s c as e w er e c om pl e t e d, vi ol a t e s the E x P os tF a c t o C l aus e of the C ons t i tut i on. F orthe r e a s ons s e t f o r th m o r e f

u lly b e lo w , w e a f

f irm . O n S e p te m b e r2 2 , 2 0 0 4 , C ap o te f ile d ap r o s e m o tio n f

o rr e tu rn o f

p r o p e r ty pur s ua ntt o R ul e 41( e ) ( now R ul e 41( g) ) . I n i t , C apot e s t a t e d tha t , on S e pt e m be r7, 1990, the F e de r a l B ur e au of I nve s t i ga t i on ( F B I ) a nd D rug E nf or c e m e nt A d mi n i s tr a t i o n ( D EA ) s e i z e d $ 3 9 , 3 9 0 o f U . S. c u rr e n c y a n d j e w e l ry f r o m h i m. 1 C apot e the n a r gue d tha tthe gove rnm e ntha d vi ol a t e d hi s F i f th A m e ndm e ntdue p r o c e s s r ig h ts b e c au s e it f a ile d to n o tif

y h im th a t th e a f

o r e - m e n tio n e d p r o p e r ty w ou l d b e f

orfe i t ed and, thu s, depri ved h i m an op po rtun i ty f or a hear i ng . Incl ud ed w i th the m ot i on w a s C apot e ’ s pe r s ona l a f f i da vi tde s c r i bi ng va r i ous pi e c e s of je w e lry s e iz e d b y th e F B I a n d D E A .The g overnment’s exhibi ts included (1) two swor n decla rations by Debra L emaster , a 2 paraleg al spec ialist at FB Iheadqua rters who had ac cess to re cords relatingto the forf eiture of the currency and the jew elry ; (2) copie s of the letter s, envelope s, and return rec eipts of notices mailed to Capote; (3) c opies of the publication printed in the AJ C; and (4) the f inal decla rations of forfeiture . Also included wa s the sworn statement of Vickie B urg e, an employee of the USMS, who confirmed that Capote w as in USMS custody from March 6 until September 3, 1992, and wa s transferre d from Johnson C ounty J ail in Fort Worth, Texas to a Fe deral 3 T he gove rnm e ntr e s ponde d tha tthe F B I ha d pr oc e s s e d the j e w e l ry a nd m on eyi n q uest i on and i ni t i at ed adm i ni stra t i ve forf ei ture procee di ng s. In conn ec t i on w i th the m on ey , i n A pri l 19 92 , the F B I m ai l ed tw o n ot i ce s t o C apot e, o n e to h is la s t k n o w n a d d r e s s , a n d a n o th e rin c a r e o f th e U n ite d S ta te s M a r s h a ls S ervi ce (U S M S ) bec ause , atthatt i m e, C apot e w as i n U S M S cust od y. W i th res pect t o th e j ew el ry, th e F B I m ai l ed th ree n o t i ces, o n e i n M ay 1 9 9 2 t o C ap o t e’ s l ast k n o w n ad d ress, o n e i n M ay 1 9 9 2 i n care o f th e U S M S i n F o rtW o rth b ecau se C apot e w as i n i t s c ust od y, and o ne i n A ug ust19 92 i n car e of the F eder al C orr e c t i ons I ns t i tut i on w he r e C apot e w a s i nc a r c e r a t e d. T he not i c e s out l i ne d the pr oc e dur e f

orc ont e s t i ng the a dm i ni s tr a t i ve f or f e i tur e . A not i c e of

the s e i z ur e s a nd forf ei tures w as al so pu bl i shed i n the A t l ant a J ou rnal & C on st i tut i on , a new spaper w i th ge ne r a l c i r c ul a t i on. W i th r e s pe c tt o the c urr e nc y , publ i c a t i on w a s m a de on M a y 4, 11, a nd 18, 1992, a nd w i th r e s pe c tt o the j e w e l ry , publ i c a t i on w a s m a de on M a y 25, J une 1, a nd J une 8, 1992. A f t e rr e c e i vi ng no c l a i m s f orthe c urr e nc y or the j e w e l ry , the F B I a dm i ni s tr a t i ve l y f or f e i t e d the c urr e nc y on J ul y 27, 1992, a nd the j e w e l ry on N ove m be r16, 1992. 2Correc tional Institut e on Jul y 27, 1992. 4 T h e g o v e rn m e n t f

ir s t a r g u e d th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t la c k e d ju r is d ic tio n to e nt e r t a i n C apot e ’ s m ot i on unde rR ul e 41( g) be c aus e the e xc l us i ve r e m e dy avai l abl e t o C apot e w as foun d at§ 9 83 (e ). H ow ever , the go vernm entar gu ed that C ap o te ’s m o tio n w a s f

ile d b e y o n d th e § 9 8 3 ( e ) ( 3 ) ’s f iv e - y e a rs ta tu te o f

lim ita tio n s . T he gove rnm e nta r gue d i n the a l t e rna t i ve tha te ve n i f 28 U . S . C . § 2401( a ) ’ s s i xy e a rs ta tu te o f

lim ita tio n s ap p lie d to C ap o te ’s m o tio n , it w a s tim e - b a rr e d b e c au s e it w a s f i l e d 14 y e a r s a f

t e rthe s e i z ur e a nd 12 y e a r s a f t e rthe f or f e i tur e . T he g o v ern m en tfu rth er n o t ed th at , i n O ct o b er 1 9 9 2 , C ap o t e fi l ed a m o t i o n t o su p p ress a l l of the e vi de nc e s e i z e d f

r om hi s apa r tm e nta nd, the r e f or e , w a s a w a r e of

the se izu re o f th e c u rr en cy an d jew elry . T h u s, th e g o v er n m en t arg u ed th at C ap o te’s c la im w a s b a rr e d b y th e d o c tr in e o f la c h e s b e c au s e h e o f

f e r e d n o e x c u s e f

o rh is del ayi n chal l engi ng the forf ei ture. I n r e p ly , C ap o te a r g u e d th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t h a d e q u itab le ju r is d ic tio n to he a rhi s m ot i on f

orr e turn of

pr ope r ty a nd r e que s t e d tha thi s pr o s e pl e a di ngs be lib e r a lly c o n s tru e d . H e f u r th e ra lle g e d th a t, b e c au s e h is m o tio n a s s e r te d aF if th A m e n d m e n t v io la tio n , th e c o u r t h a d ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 3 3 1 . N e x t, C apot e a rgued thathi s c l ai m di d n otac crue un t i l a f el l ow i nm at e i nform ed hi m that a n y s e iz u r e o f

p r o p e r ty h a d to b e p r e c e d e d b y n o tic e u n d e rth e F if th A m e n d m e n t.5

T hu s, he ar gu ed thathi s m ot i on w as no tt i m e- barr ed because he had n everbeen no t i fi ed of the forf

ei ture, and, there fore , hi s c l ai m di d n otac crue un t i l he re ce i ved the go vernm ent ’ s r es po nse a nd exam i ned the exhi bi t s s ub m i tt ed. C apot e f urther re spon ded thathi s c l ai m w as no tbarr ed by l ac hes bec ause the go vernm entw as r e s p o n s ib le f

o ra n y d e la y a s ar e s u lt o f its c o n s titu tio n a lly d e f

ic ie n t n o tic e . C ap o te a r g u e d th a t th e r e c o r d in th is c a s e f a ile d to s h o w w h e n h e r e c e iv e d a n y m a il w h ile in d e te n tio n a t J o h n s o n C o u n ty J a il a n d th a t th e m e th o d s f o rm a il d e liv e ry a t b o th John son C ou nty a nd the F C I i n F ortW orth w er e s uffi ci ent . F i nal l y, C apot e a rgued th a t h e w a s e n title d to e q u itab le to llin g b e c au s e a n y d e la y in f ilin g w a s d u e s o le ly t o the gove rnm e nt ’ s i na de qua t e not i c e , a nd he ha d e xe r c i s e d di l i ge nc e upon le a rn in g th a t th e g o v e rn m e n t h a d v io la te d h is d u e p r o c e s s r ig h ts . T he di s tr i c tc our tde ni e d C apot e ’ s m ot i on, f i ndi ng tha tC apot e w a s not e nt i t l e d t o r e l i e f

unde rR ul e 41( g) be c aus e hi s e xc l us i ve r e m e dy f orc ha l l e ngi ng the f or f e i tur e on gr ounds of

i m pr ope rnot i c e w a s unde r§ 983( e ) . T he c our tthe n f ound tha tC apot e ’ s m ot i on w a s t i m e - ba rr e d unde r§ 983( e ) ( 3) ’ s f i ve - y e a rs t a tut e of l i m i t a t i ons be c aus e C apot e f i l e d hi s m ot i on m or e tha n 12 y e a r s a f t e rthe go vernm entforf

ei t ed i t s f i nal no t i ce of forf

ei ture. O n appe a l , C apot e a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr e d by appl y i ng the fi ve-y ea r s t atut e of l i m i t at i on s s etforth i n § 98 3(e) (3) w hen d enyi ng hi s m ot i on as6

tim e - b a rr e d . I n s te a d , h e a r g u e s th a t th e s ix - y e a rs ta tu te o f lim ita tio n s s e t f

o r th in § 2401( a ) appl i e s , a nd be c aus e hi s c aus e of a c t i on a c c rue d w he n he di s c ove r e d or ha d r e a s on t o di s c ove rtha thi s pr ope r ty ha d be e n f or f e i t e d w i thouts uf

f i c i e nt not i c e , hi s c l a i m c oul d notha ve a c c rue d unt i l a f t e rhe ha d f

i l e d hi s m ot i on a nd the gove rnm e ntha d f

i l e d i t s r e s pons e . C apot e a l s o a r gue s tha thi s m ot i on w a s not ba rr e d by l a c he s be c aus e hi s de l a y i n f i l i ng the m ot i on w a s due t o the g o v e rn m e n t’s in s u f

f ic ie n t n o tic e . C ap o te a ls o a s s e r ts h e w a s e n title d to e q u itab le t ol l i ng of the s t a tut e of

l i m i t a t i ons f

orthe s a m e r e a s on. W e r e vi e w adi s tr i c tc our t ’ s i nt e rpr e t a t i on a nd appl i c a t i on of as t a tut e of l i m i t at i on s de nov o. S ee U ni t ed S t at es v. C attre l l , 25 2 F . 3d 11 93 , 11 98 (11th C i r. 2 0 0 1 ) ( r e v i e w i n g ap p l i c ab i l i ty o f th e f i v e - y e a rs t a tu t e o f

l i mi t a t i o n s i n 1 9 U . S. C. § 1621 f orc i vi l f or f e i tur e s of pr oc e e ds tr a c e abl e t o na r c ot i c s a c t i vi ty unde r21 U .S .C . § 8 8 1 ) . W e n o te a t th e o u ts e t th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t c o n s tru e d C ap o te ’s R u le 41 (e ) m ot i on for are turn o f property a s a n § 98 3(e) m ot i on t o setas i de a f orfe i ture, th u s tr ig g e r in g th e f

iv e - y e a rs ta tu te o f

lim ita tio n s in § 9 8 3 ( e ) ( 3 ) . W e d e c lin e to a ddr e s s w he the rthi s w a s c orr e c tbe c aus e e ve n i f the s i x- y e a rs t a tut e of

l i m i t a t i ons s e tf or th i n § 2401( a ) appl i e d, C apot e ’ s m ot i on w oul d s t i l l be t i m e ba rr e d. A ss u m in g w ith o u t d ec id in g th at th e d istrict co rr ec tl y c o n stru ed C ap o te’s m ot i on a s one t o s e ta s i de the f or f e i tur e s , s e c t i on 983( e ) , w hi c h t ook e f f e c ton7

A ug ust23 , 20 00 , prov i des “ the excl usi ve re m edy f or se eki ng t o setas i de a d e c la r a tio n o f

f o r f e itu r e u n d e rac iv il f

o r f e itu r e s ta tu te .” 1 8 U .S .C . § 9 8 3 ( e ) ( 5 ) . A m ot i on t o setas i de a f

orfe i ture und er§ 9 83 (e ) “ m aybe fi l ed no tl at erthan 5 ye ar s a f t e rthe da t e of

f i na l publ i c a t i on of

not i c e of

the s e i z ur e of

the pr ope r ty . ” 18 U . S . C . § 9 83 (e )( 3). H er e, C apot e f i l ed hi s m ot i on 12 ye ar s a ft erthe fi nal no t i ce s of publ i c a t i on of

the s e i z ur e of

both the c urr e nc y a nd j e w e l ry , a nd hi s m ot i on, the r e f or e , w a s t i m e - ba rr e d unde r§ 983. I n th e a lte rn a tiv e , C ap o te a r g u e s th a t th e f o r f e itu r e o c c u rr e d in 1 9 9 2 , p r io rto § 9 8 3 's p a s s a g e , a n d , th e r e f o r e , 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 4 0 1 ( a ) ’s s ix - y e a r“c a tc h - a ll” s ta tu te o f lim ita tio n s s h o u ld ap p ly . A s s u m in g w ith o u t d e c id in g th a t C ap o te is c o rr e c t, § 2 40 1(a) prov i des that“ every c i vi l ac t i on com m ence d agai nstthe U ni t ed S t at es s ha l l be ba rr e d unl e s s the c om pl a i nti s f i l e d w i thi n s i x y e a r s a f

t e rthe r i ghtof

a c t i on fi rs tac crues. ” 28 U . S . C . § 2 40 1(a) . T he core i ss ue un der § 24 01 (a ) i s w hen C apot e ’ s c l a i m a c c rue d. T o da t e , thi s C our tha s nota ddr e s s e d the que s t i on of w hen a cl ai m ac crues und er§ 2 40 1(a) . C apot e urges thi s C ou rtt o app l y the t es tse t f o r th b y th e S e c o n d C ir c u it in P o la n c o v . U n ite d S ta te s D ru g E n f o r c e m e n t A d m in ., 1 5 8 F .3 d 6 4 7 ( 2 d C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) , a n d th e g o v e rn m e n t h a s n o t o b je c te d to th e u s e o f

th is te s t. T he S e c ond C i r c ui tha s he l d tha tac l a i m a c c rue s unde r§ 2401 w he n the8

pl ai nt i ff “ di sc ov er ed or had reas on t o d i sc ov erthathi s property had been forfe i t ed w ith o u t s u f

f ic ie n t n o tic e .” P o la n c o , 1 5 8 F .3 d a t 6 5 4 . I n th a t c a s e , th e r e c o r d d id notr e f l e c tw he the rorw he n the de f e nda ntha d hi s pr ope r ty f or f e i t e d, butthe S e c ond C i r c ui trul e d tha tthe de f e nda nt ’ s c l a i m w oul d ha ve be gun t o a c c rue a tthe e a r l i e rof tw o pos s i bl e da t e s : ( 1) a tthe c l os e of f or f e i tur e pr oc e e di ngs , or( 2) i f no f or f e i tur e pr oc e e di ngs ha d be gun, w he n the f i ve - y e a rs t a tut e of

l i m i t a t i ons f

orthe go vernm entt o i ni t i at e f orfe i ture procee di ng s c on cl ud ed. Id. A s C apot e’ s s ui tw as fi l ed m ore than 1 2 yea rs af t erthe forf

ei tures i n thi s c as e had concl ud ed, even fol l ow i ng the P ol anco rul e, hi s pre se ntm ot i on w ou l d b e unt i m el y und er§ 2 40 1(a) . M o r e o v e r , ta k in g ab r o a d e rs ta n c e th a n th e S e c o n d C ir c u it, th e F o u r th C i rc ui thas hel d thata c l ai m ant ’ s c ause of ac t i on for i nadequ at e not i ce of forf ei ture ac crues und er§ 2 40 1 atthe ea rl i erof tw o d at es : “ w hen h e f i rs tbeca m e a w ar e that the gove rnm e ntha d de c l a r e d the [ pr ope r ty ] f or f e i t e d, orw he n a n i nqui ry tha the c oul d r e a s onabl y ha ve be e n e xpe c t e d t o m a ke w oul d ha ve m a de hi m a w a r e of the fo rfei tu re. ” U n i t ed S t at es v . M i n o r, 2 2 8 F . 3 d 3 5 2 , 3 5 9 (4 th C i r. 2 0 0 0 ); see al so U ni t e d S t a t e s v. R odr i gue z - A gui rr e , 264 F . 3d 1195, 1214 ( 10th C i r . 2001) ( hol di ng tha tac l a i m a nt ’ s c aus e of a c t i on a c c rue s a tthe e a r l i e rof tw o da t e s : “ ( 1) the da t e on w hi c h the c l a i m a ntdi s c ove r e d tha tthe pr ope r ty w a s f or f e i t e d, or( 2) the da t e on w hi ch the cl ai m antcoul d rea sonabl y be e xp ec t ed t o h ave m ade a n i nq ui rythat9

w o u l d h a v e ma d e h i m a w a r e o f th e f o r f e i tu r e . ” ) . Cap o t e a r g u e s h e d i d n o tb e c o me a w a r e of the f or f e i tur e unt i l 2004. H ow e ve r , C apot e c oul d r e a s onabl y ha ve i nq ui re d abo uthi s property 12 yea rs ea rl i er , w hen h e knew i thad b ee n sei ze d, as evi denced by hi s f

i l i ng a m ot i on t o sup pres s on O ct ob er6, 19 92 . T here fore , even appl y i ng the F our th C i r c ui t ’ s rul e , hi s m ot i on i s t i m e - ba rr e d. A c c or di ngl y , gi vi ng C apot e the f

ul l be ne f i tof hi s a r gum e nttha t§ 2401( a ) appl i e s , w e s t i l l c onc l ude th a t C ap o te ’s m o tio n w a s tim e - b a rr e d . A s t o C apot e ’ s e qui t abl e t ol l i ng a r gum e nt , w e ha ve not , t o da t e , appl i e d the e q u itab le to llin g d o c tr in e to § 9 8 3 o r§ 2 4 0 1 ( a ) c a s e s . H o w e v e r , w e h a v e h e ld th a t, abse ntC on gres si on al i nt entt o the contra ry , pri nci pl es of equi t abl e t ol l i ng ar e r ea d i nt o e ve ry f

e de r a l s t a tut e of

l i m i t a t i on. C ook v. D e l t onaC orp. , 753 F . 2d 1552, 1 5 6 2 ( 1 9 8 5 ) . A s s u m in g th a t § 9 8 3 ( e ) ( 3 ) ’s s ta tu te o f lim ita tio n s m a y b e e q u itab ly to lle d , th e d o c tr in e o f

“e q u itab le to llin g ” is a n e x tr a o r d in a ry r e m e d y th a t w e ap p ly

“ spar i ng l y. ” S ee , e. g. , D re w v. D ep’ tof C orrs . , 29 7 F . 3d 12 78 , 12 86 (11th C i r. 2002) ( not i ng tha te qui t abl e t ol l i ng i s a va i l abl e t o t ol l the s t a tut e of l i m i t a t i ons f

or f i l i ng 28 U . S . C . § 2254 habe a s pe t i t i ons ) . “ [ I ] ti s ‘ appr opr i a t e w he n am ova nt u n tim e lyf

ile s b e c au s e o f

e x tr a o r d in a ry c ir c u m s ta n c e s th a t a r e b o th b e y o n d h is c o n tr o l a n d u n a v o id ab le e v e n w ith d ilig e n c e .’” I d . ( c ita tio n o m itte d a n d e m p h a s is i n o ri g i n al ). T h e b u rd en o f est ab l i sh i n g en t i t l em en tt o th i s “ ex trao rd i n ary rem ed y”10

is c le a r ly w ith C ap o te . I d . W hi l e C apot e a r gue s tha thi s f a i l ur e t o f

i l e a n e a r l i e rm ot i on w a s due t o the g o v e rn m e n t’s n e g lig e n c e in f a ilin g to p r o v id e h im n o tic e , th is a r g u m e n t is m e r i t l e s s . C apot e be c a m e a w a r e of the f or f e i tur e a tthe l a t e s ti n O c t obe r1992, w h e n h e f

ile d am o tio n to s u p p r e s s a ll e v id e n c e s e iz e d f r o m h is r e s id e n c e . D e s p ite tha tknow l e dge , C apot e ne ve rf i l e d am ot i on t o ha ve hi s pr ope r ty r e turne d, but i nst ea d w ai t ed m ore than 1 2 yea rs t o chal l enge the forf ei ture, and, there fore , fa i l ed t o e xe r c i s e a ny di l i ge nc e . A c c or di ngl y , C apot e w a s note nt i t l e d t o e qui t abl e t ol l i ng o f e ith e rs ta tu te o f

lim ita tio n s . L a s t l y , t o the e xt e nttha tC apot e a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our t ’ s appl i c a t i on of § 9 8 3 ( e ) ’s f

iv e - y e a rs ta tu te o f

lim ita tio n s c au s e d a n e x p o s t f a c to v io la tio n , h e d id n o t r a is e th is c h a lle n g e in th e d is tr ic t c o u r t, a n d w e w ill r e v ie w o n ly f o rp la in e rr o r . U n ite d S ta te s v . M ir a n d a , 1 9 7 F .3 d 1 3 5 7 , 1 3 5 8 - 5 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 9 ) . “A n ap p e lla te courtm ayno tcorr ec tan error the defendantfa i l ed t o rai se i n the di stri ctcourt un l es s there i s: (1) e rr or, (2) thati s pl ai n, and (3) thataf fe ct s s ub st ant i al ri gh t s. ” U n ite d S ta te s v . R o d r ig u e z , 3 9 8 F .3 d 1 2 9 1 , 1 2 9 8 ( 1 1 th C ir .) , c e r t. d e n ie d 1 2 5 S .C t. 29 35 (200 5) (quo t at i on and ci t at i on om i tt ed). “ If al l three cond i t i on s a re m et , an ap p e lla te c o u r t m a y th e n e x e r c is e its d is c r e tio n to n o tic e af o r f e ite d e rr o r , b u t o n ly i f ( 4) the e rr ors e r i ous l y a f f e c t s the f a i rne s s , i nt e gr i ty , orpubl i c r e put a t i on of11

ju d ic ia l p r o c e e d in g s .” I d . T he E x P os tF a c t o C l aus e of the C ons t i tut i on pr ovi de s tha t“ N o B i l l of A tt a i nde rore x pos tf

a c t o L a w s ha l l be pa s s e d. ” U . S . C ons t . A r t . I § 9, c l . 3. “ T he E x P o stF act o C l au se o p erat es n o tt o p ro t ectan i n d i v i d u al ’ s ri g h tt o l ess p u n is h m e n t, b u t r a th e ra s am e a n s o f a s s u r in g th a t a n in d iv id u a l w ill r e c e iv e f a ir w a rni ng of

c r i m i na l s t a tut e s a nd the puni s hm e nt s the y c a rry . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B o rd o n , 4 2 1 F . 3 d 1 2 0 2 , 1 2 0 7 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 5 ). “ [I] n o rd er t o p rev ai l o n an ex p o st fa ct o cl ai m , a def

endant‘ m ustshow bo th thatthe l aw he chal l enges operat es r e tr o a c tiv e ly ( th a t it ap p lie s to c o n d u c t c o m p le te d b e f o r e its e n a c tm e n t) a n d th a t it r a i s e s the pe na l ty f

r om w ha t e ve rthe l a w pr ovi de d w he n he a c t e d. ’ ” I d. A s s um i ng th a t § 9 8 3 ap p lie s r e tr o a c tiv e ly to f o r f e itu r e s o c c u rr in g b e f

o r e th e d a te o f

its p a s s a g e , n o th in g in § 9 8 3 o p e r a te s to r a is e th e p e n a lty f o rac r im e th a t C ap o te com m i tt ed. S ee al so D ufre sne v. B ae r, 74 4 F . 2d 15 43 , 15 46 (11th C i r. 19 84 ) ( “ [a ] la w w h ic h is m e r e ly p r o c e d u r a l a n d d o e s n o t a d d to th e q u a n tu m o f p u n is h m e n t, ho w ever , ca nn otvi ol at e the ex po stfa ct o cl ause even i f i ti s app l i ed r e tr o s p e c tiv e ly .” ) . T h u s , w e c o n c lu d e th a t th e r e w a s n o e x p o s t f a c to v io la tio n in thi s c as e. B as ed on the foregoi ng di sc ussi on , w e c on cl ud e thatC apot e’ s m ot i on w as ti m e- b ar re d u n d ereith er§ 9 8 3 ' s f iv e- ye arstatu te o f lim it atio n s o r § 2 4 0 1 (a )’s12

s ix - y e a rs ta tu te o f

lim ita tio n s , a n d th a t ap p lic a tio n o f § 9 8 3 ( e ) ( 3 ) d id n o t r e s u lt in a n e x pos tf

a c t o vi ol a t i on. A c c or di ngl y , w e c onc l ude tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tdi d not c o m m it a n y r e v e r s ib le e rr o rb y d e n y in g C ap o te ’s m o tio n . W e , th e r e f o r e , a f f irm . AF F I RME D.