USA v. Real property located at 9445 Fruitridge Road, Sacramento, California, Sacramento County, APN Nos: 063-0060-045 and 063-0060-046
Filing
34
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/26/14: This matter is stayed until September 30, 2014. On or before September 30, 2014, the parties shall advise the court whether a further stay is necessary. (Kaminski, H)
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
2 KEVIN C. KHASIGIAN
Assistant U.S. Attorney
3 501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
4 Telephone: (916) 554-2700
1
5
Attorneys for the United States
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
v.
REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9445
FRUITRIDGE ROAD, SACRAMENTO,
CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO
COUNTY, APN NOS: 063-0060-045 AND
063-0060-046 INCLUDING ALL
APPURTENANCES AND
IMPROVEMENTS THERETO,
2:11-CV-01902-JAM-DAD
REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF STAY OF
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AND ORDER
DATE: N/A
TIME: N/A
COURTROOM: N/A
Defendant.
19
20
The United States of America and David Johns, Mary Johns, and Major Amos Nilson
21
and Lucy H. Nilson, Trustees of the Nilson Family Revocable Trust (hereafter referred to
22
collectively as "claimants") submit the following Request for Extension of Stay of Further
23
Proceedings and Proposed Order.
24
This matter was previously stayed on September 15, 2011, November 28, 2011,
25
February 1, 2012, May 1, 2012, August 1, 2012, November 1, 2012, January 30, 2013, April
26
30, 2013, July 30, 2013, and October 30, 2013, based on the on-going criminal investigation
27
into marijuana cultivation at 9445 Fruitridge Road, Sacramento, California (hereafter
28
"defendant property"). To date, several individuals have been charged with federal
1
Request for Extension of Stay of Further
Proceedings and Order
1
criminal crimes related to marijuana cultivation at the defendant property, Case Nos. 2:11-
2
CR-00275-JAM and 2:11-CR-00276-JAM; but neither David Johns nor Mary Johns, the
3
record owners of the defendant property, have been charged with any criminal offense by
4
state, local, or federal authorities.
1.
5
Each of the claimants has filed a claim to the defendant property. Claimants
6
David Johns, Mary Johns, Major Amos Nilson, and Lucy H. Nilson have not yet filed their
7
Answers and will not be required to do so until the stay contemplated by this stipulation
8
expires.
2.
9
The stay is requested pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(g)(1), 981(g)(2), and 21
10
U.S.C. § 881(i). The United States contends that the defendant property was used to
11
facilitate the cultivation of marijuana.
3.
12
It is the United States’ position that the statute of limitations has not expired
13
on potential criminal charges relating to the marijuana grow at the defendant property.
14
Nevertheless, the United States intends to depose claimants David and Mary Johns
15
regarding their ownership of the defendant property, as well as their knowledge and
16
participation in large scale marijuana cultivation, including the marijuana grow at the
17
defendant property. If discovery proceeds at this time, claimants will be placed in the
18
difficult position of either invoking their Fifth Amendment rights against self-
19
incrimination and losing the ability to pursue their claims to the defendant property, or
20
waiving their Fifth Amendment rights and submitting to a deposition and potentially
21
incriminating themselves. If they invoke their Fifth Amendment rights, the United States
22
will be deprived of the ability to explore the factual basis for the claims they filed with this
23
court.
24
4.
In addition, claimants intend to depose, among others, the agents involved
25
with this investigation, including but not limited to the agents with the Drug Enforcement
26
Administration and the Internal Revenue Service. Allowing depositions of the law
27
enforcement officers at this time would adversely affect the ability of the federal authorities
28
to investigate the alleged underlying criminal conduct.
2
Request for Extension of Stay of Further
Proceedings and Order
1
2
5.
The parties recognize that proceeding with these actions at this time has
3
potential adverse effects on the investigation of the underlying criminal conduct and/or
4
upon the claimants' ability to prove their claim to the property and to assert any defenses
5
to forfeiture. For these reasons, the parties jointly request that the matter be stayed until
6
September 30, 2014, in accordance with the terms of this stipulation. At that time the
7
parties will advise the court of the status of the criminal investigation, if any, and will
8
advise the court whether a further stay is necessary.
9
Dated: 3/25/14
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
10
By:
11
12
/s/ Kevin C. Khasigian
KEVIN C. KHASIGIAN
Assistant U.S. Attorney
13
14
Dated: 3/25/14
/s/ Brenda Grantland
BRENDA GRANTLAND
Attorney for claimants
David Johns and Mary Johns
Dated: 3/26/14
/s/ Douglas A. MacDonald
DOUGLAS A. MACDONALD
Attorney for claimants Major
Amos Nilson and Lucy H. Nilson
15
16
17
18
19
(Signatures authorized by email)
20
ORDER
21
22
For the reasons set forth above, this matter is stayed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
23
981(g)(1), 981(g)(2), and 21 U.S.C. § 881(i) until September 30, 2014. On or before
24
September 30, 2014, the parties will advise the court whether a further stay is necessary.
25
26
27
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
3/26/2014
/s/ John A. Mendez_______________
JOHN A. MENDEZ
United States District Court Judge
28
3
Request for Extension of Stay of Further
Proceedings and Order
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?