United States of America v. Approximately $40,600.00 in U.S. Currency

Filing 19

STIPULATION and ORDER to STAY PROCEEDINGS (Doc. 18 ), Signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 6/18/2015. CASE STAYED. (Arellano, S.)

Harvey A. Steinberg, Pro hac vice

1 Springer & Steinberg, P.C.

2 1600 Broadway, Suite 1200

Denver, CO 80202
3 [phone]
Attorney for Claimant Josue Grajeda

4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

12

Plaintiff,

13

16
17

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO STAY
PROCEEDINGS

v.
(Doc. 19)

14
15

Case No. 1:15-cv-00237---SKO

APPROXIMATELY $40,600.00 IN U.S.
CURRENCY,
Defendant.
_____________________________________/

18
19
Claimant, Josue Grajeda (hereto after AClaimant@), by and through his attorney, Harvey A.

20
21
22
23

Steinberg, of the law firm of Springer & Steinberg, P.C., and the United States of America by and
through Assistant United States Attorney Jeffrey A. Spivak respectfully submit this stipulation and
move this Court to now order same.
AS GROUNDS THEREFOR, the parties state as follows:

24
25
26
27
28

1.

The Government is seeking forfeiture of currency. The Claimant has filed his verified

statement of claim of that currency and persists in his claim.

1 2.

The Claimant currently faces criminal charges in Fresno County California in case number

2 F14906072. The allegations in that case are similar or identical to the allegations made by the
3 Government in this case in support of this forfeiture.
4 3.

18 U.S.C. § 981 (g) (2) states:

5

Upon the motion of a claimant, the court shall stay the civil forfeiture proceeding
with respect to that claimant if the court determines that—

6
7

(A) the claimant is the subject of a related criminal investigation or case;

8

(B) the claimant has standing to assert a claim in the civil forfeiture
proceeding; and

9
(C) continuation of the forfeiture proceeding will burden the right of the
claimant against self-incrimination in the related investigation or case.

10
11 4.

The Claimant submits that these proceedings should be stayed for the following reasons:

12

a.

13

in this civil forfeiture proceeding;

14

b.

The Claimant has standing to assert a claim in this civil forfeiture proceeding; and,

15

c.

Continuation of this forfeiture proceeding will burden the right of the Claimant

16

against self-incrimination as guaranteed to him by the Fifth Amendment to the United

17

States Constitution in the related case.

18 5.

Under these circumstances the Claimant cannot file a meaningful answer. The aversions in

The Claimant is the subject of a related criminal case directly implicating the facts

19 the Complaint touch on allegations that are the subject of the related criminal case. See e.g.
20 United States v. Parcels of Land, 903 F.2d 36, 43 (1st Cir. 1990) (upholding the striking of the
21 affidavit of a claimant after he invoked the fifth amendment in response to government questions).
22 6.

Courts should endeavor to accommodate the Claimant’s Fifth Amendment rights in

23 forfeiture proceedings. United States v. A Certain Parcel of Land, 781 F. Supp. 830, 834 (D.N.H.
24 1992) citing United States v. Parcels of Land, 903 F.2d 36, 44 (1st Cir. 1990). Staying the civil
25 case prevents the government from using civil discovery as a means to obtain information to flesh
26 out the criminal case against the claimants. United States v. Certain Real Prop., 579 F.3d 1315,
27 1321 (11th Cir. 2009).
28
2

1 7.

Even in the general civil context where there is not specific statutory language

2 commanding the stay of a civil proceeding it is recognized that the Fifth Amendment can and
3 should be invoked when it can be implicated. The privilege against self-incrimination, one of our
4 most cherished fundamental rights, is jealously guarded by the courts. It protects an individual not
5 only from involuntarily becoming a witness against himself in a criminal proceeding but also from
6 answering specific allegations in a complaint or filing responses to interrogatories in a civil action
7 where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal actions. North River Ins. Co. v.
8 Stefanou, 831 F.2d 484, 486-487 (4th Cir. 1987).
9 8.

For the above stated reasons the parties have agreed that this matter should be stayed and

10 respectfully requests that this Court stay the proceedings in this matter pending the outcome of the
11 related criminal case.
12 9.

Should the Court stay this matter, the Claimant will file notice with the Court of

13 completion of the above-referenced criminal case, within 60 days of that completion.
14
15

WHEREFORE, the parties pray for the relief requested, and for such other and further

16 relief as to the Court seems just and proper in the premises.
17
18

Dated this 18th day of June, 2015.

19

Respectfully submitted,

20

s/Harvey A. Steinberg
Harvey A. Steinberg
Springer & Steinberg, P.C.
Attorneys for Josue Grajeda
1600 Broadway, Suite 1200
Denver, Colorado 80202
[phone] Telephone
[phone] Telecopier
[e-mail]

21
22
23
24
25

/s/Jeffrey A. Spivak
Jeffrey A. Spivak
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorney for the United States
501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, California 95814
[phone] Telephone
[phone] Telecopier
[e-mail]

26 IT IS SO ORDERED.
27
28

Dated:

June 18, 2015

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4