With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". F.3d at 379. Deering’s argument that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over him because his crime did not take place on federally-owned land and the Tenth Amendment reserves drug prosecutions such as his to the states is without merit. See United States v. Owens, 996 F.2d 59, 61 (5th Cir.1993) (per curiam) (prosecution under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a) and 846 did “not run Cir.1996) (where defendant did not object below, this court reviews for plain error only), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1133, 117 S.Ct. 998, 136 L.Ed.2d 877 (1997). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 1 . The Honorable Michael J. Melloy, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. 2 . Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963)

A: holding that suppression of evidence by the prosecution of evidence favorable to the defendant upon request violates the defendants right to due process where the evidence is material
B: holding that suppression by government of evidence favorable to accused upon request violates due process when evidence is material to guilt
C: holding that suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution
D: holding that suppression of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process when evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution
B.