Pedro Pete Benevides v. United States

In 2008, the Government seized more than $40 million in funds belonging to Pedro Benevides during a narcotics investigation. The Government had to dismiss the case because key witnesses provided false statements. The Government did not return the funds; instead, it changed its story and claimed in a civil forfeiture case that the money came from a Ponzi scheme. The Government never indicted Mr. Benevides, or anyone else, for the Ponzi scheme. After holding the funds for five years, the Government indicted Mr. Benevides for conspiracy and bank fraud in September of 2013. Mr. Benevides pled guilty to conspiring to commit bank fraud. As a condition of his plea, he had to withdraw his claim to the $40 million seized in the unfounded drug case. He also had to forfeit an additional $44 million. Mr. Benevides moved to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He argued his counsel provided ineffective assistance by telling him a forfeiture of $44 million was reasonable and failing to tell him it was an excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment. His attorney also told him that the plea would result in a minimal sentence and allow him to retain $3 million. The district court denied his claims without a hearing. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed. The questions presented are: 1. Does the forfeiture of over $44 million constitute an excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment, where the forfeiture amount is more than 44 times greater