United States of America v. Approximately $30,670.00 in U.S. Currency

Filing 39

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 11/26/18 STAYING case until 01/11/19. On or before 01/04/19, the parties will advise the Court whether a further stay is necessary. (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
4 McGREGOR W. SCOTT United States Attorney ERIN M. SALES Assistant U.S. Attorney 2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401 Fresno, CA 93721 Telephone: (559) 497-4000 5 Attorneys for the United States 1 2 3 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. 2:14-CV-02586-MCE STIPULATION AND ORDER TO STAY FURTHER PROCEEDINGS APPROXIMATELY $30,670.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY, Defendant. 16 17 18 The United States and claimant Christian Dapaah (“Claimant”) hereby stipulate that a further 19 stay is necessary in the above-entitled action, and request that the Court enter an order staying all 20 further proceedings due to an on-going related criminal case against Claimant in Stanislaus County 21 Superior Court: People v. Christian William Dapaah, Case No. 1459889. A Motion for Factual 22 Innocence is presently scheduled for hearing on November 30, 2018. 23 1. Claimant has filed a claim in this in rem forfeiture action, asserting he is the legal and 24 rightful owner of the defendant property in this action. (ECF No. 6.) 25 2. The stay is requested pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 981(g)(1)–(2). The United States 26 contends that the defendant currency was derived from or was intended to be used in a violation of 27 federal law, 21 U.S.C. § 841, et seq. (manufacturing, distributing, or dispensing, or possessing with 28 intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, a controlled substance). Claimant denies these Stipulation and Order to Stay Further Proceedings 1 29 30 1 allegations. 2 3. The United States intends to depose Claimant regarding his claim and the allegations as 3 set forth in the complaint. If discovery proceeds at this time, Claimant will be placed in the difficult 4 position of either invoking his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and losing the ability 5 to pursue his claim to the Defendant Currency, or waiving his Fifth Amendment rights and submitting 6 to a deposition and potentially incriminating himself. If he invokes his Fifth Amendment rights, the 7 United States will be deprived of the ability to explore the factual basis for the claim he filed with this 8 Court. 9 4. The parties recognize that proceeding with this action at this time has potential adverse 10 effects on the criminal case and/or upon the claimant’s ability to assert any defenses to forfeiture. For 11 these reasons, and because the parties are attempting to settle the civil forfeiture case, the parties jointly 12 request that these matters be stayed until January 11, 2019, in accordance with the terms of this 13 stipulation. 14 5. At that time the parties will advise the Court of the status of the criminal case and will 15 advise the court whether a further stay is necessary. 16 Respectfully submitted, 17 Dated: November 19, 2018 McGREGOR W. SCOTT United States Attorney 18 19 20 By: /s/ Erin M. Sales ERIN M. SALES Assistant U.S. Attorney 21 22 Dated: November 19, 2018 23 24 /s/ Austin Thompson AUSTIN THOMPSON GARCIA, SCHNAYERSON & THOMPSON Attorney for Claimant Christian Dapaah (As approved by email on 11/19/2018) 25 26 27 28 29 30 2 Stipulation and Order to Stay Further Proceedings 1 2 ORDER For the reasons set forth above, this matter is stayed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 981(g)(1)–(2) 3 until January 11, 2019, in accordance with the terms of this stipulation. On or before January 4, 2019, 4 the parties will advise the Court whether a further stay is necessary. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 Dated: November 26, 2018 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 3 Stipulation and Order to Stay Further Proceedings

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?