United States v. Dale Peters
783 F.3d 1361
11th Cir.2015Background
- Dale Peters was convicted of tax-fraud offenses and sentenced to 144 months imprisonment and $5,362,039.69 restitution; his conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal.
- The government filed an Application and then an Amended Application for a Writ of Execution to levy Peters’s California residence; the Amended Application omitted the property description but the clerk entered an Amended Writ based on the original filing.
- Peters, incarcerated at USP Atwater in California, filed a timely response requesting a hearing and that the writ proceedings be transferred to the district where he resides (California); he also asserted the property was exempt and that the restitution order was not final because his criminal appeal was pending.
- The district court concluded the restitution order was not stayed and that the property was not exempt, denied transfer and a hearing, and granted the government’s Amended Application for Writ of Execution.
- The Eleventh Circuit found Peters’s requests to be timely, held the FDCPA’s transfer and hearing provisions are mandatory when timely requested by an incarcerated debtor, vacated the district court’s order, and remanded with instructions to transfer the proceeding to the California district for a hearing and decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether district court must transfer writ proceedings to district where debtor resides under FDCPA § 3004(b)(2) | Peters: timely requested transfer; FDCPA uses mandatory "shall"; transfer required for incarcerated debtor to attend hearing | Government: court did not transfer; argued no transfer appropriate (implicit reliance on court discretion or procedural posture) | Transfer is mandatory when timely requested; district court erred by refusing to transfer |
| Whether debtor was entitled to a hearing under FDCPA § 3202(d) after timely request | Peters: timely requested hearing within statutory period; court must hold hearing | Government: proceeded to levy after Amended Writ; denied hearing | Court must hold a hearing upon timely request; remanded for hearing in transferee district |
Key Cases Cited
- Mayer v. Wall St. Equity Grp., Inc., 672 F.3d 1222 (11th Cir. 2012) (defining a "final decision" for appellate jurisdiction)
- United States v. Duran, 701 F.3d 912 (11th Cir. 2012) (FDCPA provides exclusive civil procedures for federal criminal judgment enforcement)
- United States v. Bradley, 644 F.3d 1213 (11th Cir. 2011) (discussing FDCPA remedies and writs of execution)
- In re Tennyson, 611 F.3d 873 (11th Cir. 2010) ("shall" in statute imposes nondiscretionary duty)
- United States v. Nash, 175 F.3d 440 (6th Cir. 1999) (statute’s mandatory transfer language requires granting timely transfer requests)