No. 21-7673

Dimitar Petlechkov v. United States

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-04-21
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 21-usc-853 circuit-split criminal-forfeiture forfeiture-law money-judgment personal-money-judgment statutory-interpretation substitute-assets
Key Terms:
Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2022-05-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Can a district court order forfeiture of substitute assets far in excess of the personal money judgment balance owed?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Question 1: Can a district court order forfeiture of substitute assets far in excess of the personal money judgment balance owed? 21 U.S.C. § 853(p) authorizes forfeiture of substitute assets only "up to the value of" the unavailable offense proceeds. Until now, every district and circuit court had found that the forfeiture of substitute assets exceeding the value of the personal money judgment was not authorized by the statute. The District Court for the Western District of Tennessee entered a forfeiture order against Petitioner which vested in the government title to three parcels of real property worth a combined total of three times the money judgment amount Petitioner owes. The Sixth Circuit currently stands alone when it affirmed this forfeiture order as lawful. Thus, this decision has created a circuit split with the Second, Fourth, Seventh and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeal.

Docket Entries

2022-05-31
Petition DENIED.
2022-05-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/26/2022.
2022-05-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2022-04-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 23, 2022)

Attorneys

Dimitar Petlechkov
Dimitar Petlechkov — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent