United States of America v. Real property located at 705 through 709 South California Street, Stockton, California, San Joaquin County, APN: 149-084-06
Filing
29
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 12/5/12: This matter is stayed until February 4, 2013. On or before February 4, 2013, the parties shall advise the court whether a further stay is appropriate. (Kaminski, H)
1
4
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
KEVIN C. KHASIGIAN
Assistant U.S. Attorney
501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: (916)554-2700
5
Attorneys for the United States
2
3
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
2:12-CV-00811-JAM-EFB
STIPULATION TO STAY FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS AND ORDER
v.
17
REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 705
THROUGH 709 SOUTH CALIFORNIA
STREET, STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA,
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, APN: 149084-06, INCLUDING ALL
APPURTENANCES AND
IMPROVEMENTS THERETO,
18
Defendant.
15
16
19
20
The United States of America and claimants Sam Luigi Toccoli, Lisa Toccoli
21
Stenard and Albert Toccoli, by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate
22
that a stay is appropriate in the above-entitled action, and request that the Court enter
23
an order staying further proceedings until February 4, 2013. The basis for the
24
proposed stay is the related criminal action against two individuals charged with
25
cultivating marijuana at the defendant property, United States v. Brandon Conley,
26
2:12-CR-00077-JAM, and the ongoing criminal investigation into marijuana cultivation
27
at the defendant property.
28
1.
The Beverly J. Toccoli Marital Deduction Trust U/A/D 8/11/99 is record
1
Stipulation to Stay Further Proceedings and Order
1
owner of a one-half undivided seventh-eighths interest. The S.L. Toccoli Survivor
2
Trust U/A/D 8/11/99 is the record owner of a one-half undivided seventh-eighths
3
interest. Allyal Properties, a California General Partnership, is the record owner of an
4
undivided one-eighth interest. Each of the claimants has filed a claim to the defendant
5
property based on various interests connected to the above-identified trusts and/or
6
business entities.
7
2.
The stay is requested pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 981(g)(1), 981(g)(2), and 21
8
U.S.C. § 881(i).
9
3.
To date, two individuals have been charged with federal criminal crimes
10
related to marijuana cultivation at the defendant property, United States v. Brandon
11
Conley, 2:12-CR-00077-JAM. (None of the claimants have been charged with any
12
criminal offense by state, local, or federal authorities.) It is the United States' position
13
that the statute of limitations has not expired on potential criminal charges relating to
14
the marijuana grow at the defendant property. The United States intends to depose
15
those charged with crimes connected to the marijuana grow at the defendant property
16
regarding their knowledge and/or participation in the large scale marijuana cultivation
17
and property ownership. If discovery proceeds at this time, these individuals, or some
18
of them, will be placed in the difficult position of either invoking their Fifth
19
Amendment rights against self-incrimination or waiving their Fifth Amendment rights
20
and submitting to a deposition and potentially incriminating themselves (at least one
21
individual prior to a criminal trial). If they invoke their Fifth Amendment rights, the
22
United States will be deprived of the ability to explore the factual basis for the claims
23
they filed with this court.
24
4.
In addition, claimants intend to depose, among others, the agents
25
involved with this investigation, including but not limited to the agents with the Drug
26
Enforcement Administration and the Internal Revenue Service. Allowing depositions
27
of the law enforcement officers at this time would adversely affect the ability of the
28
federal authorities to prepare for the criminal trial and/or further investigate the
2
Stipulation to Stay Further Proceedings and Order
1
2
alleged underlying criminal conduct.1
5.
The parties recognize that proceeding with these actions at this time
3
could have potential adverse effects on the investigation of the underlying criminal
4
conduct and/or upon the claimants' ability to prove their claim to the property and to
5
assert any defenses to forfeiture. For these reasons, the parties jointly request that
6
these matters be stayed until February 4, 2013, in accordance with the terms of this
7
stipulation. At that time the parties will advise the court of the status of the criminal
8
investigation and will advise the court whether a further stay is appropriate.2
9
Dated: 12/4/12
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
10
11
By:
12
/s/ Kevin C. Khasigian
KEVIN C. KHASIGIAN
Assistant U.S. Attorney
13
Dated: 12/4/12
/s/ Kenneth C. Mennemeier, Jr.
KENNETH C. MENNEMEIER, JR.
Attorney for claimants
(Authorized by phone)
14
15
16
17
ORDER
For the reasons set forth above, this matter is stayed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§
18
981(g)(1), 981(g)(2), and 21 U.S.C. § 881(i) until February 4, 2013. On or before
19
February 4, 2013, the parties will advise the court whether a further stay is
20
appropriate.
21
22
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 12/5/2012
/s/ John A. Mendez
JOHN A. MENDEZ
United States District Court Judge
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
Claimants have issued written discovery to the United States concerning the marijuana
evidence used to support the forfeiture complaint. Any discovery obligations are stayed in light
of this Stipulation. The claimants reserve the right to summarily adjudicate the issues relative
to their interest in the defendant property once the stay has been lifted and discovery completed.
2
The parties filed a joint status report in the case on July 25, 2012. ECF No. 14. The
parties will file an amended joint status report once the stay is lifted.
3
Stipulation to Stay 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?