United States of America v. Approximately $118,820 and $34,000 in United States Currency
Filing
15
STIPULATION AND ORDER resetting cmc from 3/3/10 to 4/21/10 14 Joint Case Management Statement filed by United States of America. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/1/10. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/1/2010)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO (CSBN 44332) United States Attorney BRIAN J. STRETCH (CSBN 163973) Chief, Criminal Division NATALIE K. WIGHT (ORSBN 35576) Special Assistant United States Attorney 450 Golden Gate Avenue, 11th Floor San Francisco, CA 94102 Telephone: 415.436.6937 Facsimile: 415.436.7234 Email: natalie.wight@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Plaintiff JOSEPH D. ELFORD (CSBN 189934) 1322 Webster Street, Suite 402 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: 415.573.7842 Facsimile: 510.251.2036 Email: joeelford@yahoo.com Attorney for Claimant, Ciciriello
12 13 14 15 16 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 17 Plaintiff, 18 v. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I. Jurisdiction This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Sections 1345 and 1355; and Title 21, United States Code, Section 881. II. Brief Case Description This is a civil forfeiture action. The government contends there is sufficient evidence to show the defendant currency was seized as money furnished or intended to be furnished by a Defendant. APPROXIMATELY $183,820 IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY AND $34,000 IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 09-CV-3963-EMC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RESCHEDULE CMC
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
person in exchange for a controlled substance, or money traceable to such an exchange, or money used or intended to be used to facilitate a violation of Title 21, United States Code, Chapter 13, Subchapter I, and is thus subject to forfeiture. Claimant, Gary Ciciriello, denies the claims made by the United States and asserts that the government has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and that the property was seized in violation of Mr. Ciciriello's right to be free from unlawful searches and seizures. III. Service/Parties to the Action All persons known to have an interest in the defendant property have been served, including Peter Flax, Carl Grimm, Gary Ciciriello and Mr. Ciciriello's attorney, Joseph Elford. Mr. Elford filed a verified claim and answer on behalf of Mr. Ciciriello on September 25, 2009, and October 15, 2009, respectively. To date, no other claims have been filed. IV. Principal Factual and Legal Issues The principal factual and legal issues in dispute are: (1) whether claimant Gary Ciciriello can prove that the government failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted or that the defendant property was seized in violation of claimant's right to be free from unlawful searches and seizures; and (2) whether the government can establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant currency is money furnished or intended to be furnished by a person in exchange for a controlled substance, or money traceable to such an exchange, or money used or intended to be used to facilitate a drug violation of Title 21, United States Code, Chapter 13, Subchapter I. V. Anticipated Motions The related criminal investigation of Mr. Ciciriello is on-going and being reviewed by local law enforcement and the local prosecutors's office; therefore, the parties recommend a 30-day continuance of the Case Management Conference. If the local authorities pursue prosecution of Mr. Ciciriello, the United States will file a 18 U.S.C. §981(g)(1) motion to stay federal civil forfeiture proceedings. Additionally, the government may file a motion to dismiss the claimant's §1983 counter-claim as improperly brought in this in rem forfeiture action.
JOINT CMC STATEMENT C 09-3963-EMC
2
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
VI.
Relief/Damages The government seeks a judgment of forfeiture of the defendant currency. Claimant
seeks return of the defendant currency, interest, attorney's fees, damages and attorney's fees for 42 U.S.C. §1983 violations, and other such relief that is just and equitable. VII. Settlement The parties have briefly discussed settlement but no settlement has been reached at this time. VIII. Discovery Both parties anticipate to propound discovery in this case (interrogatories, document requests and depositions); however, the discovery time line will be determined by the Court and the possible request for a stay pending the results of the open criminal investigation of claimant Ciciriello. IX. Alternative Means of Disposition At this time the parties do not request reference to arbitration or to a United States Magistrate Judge for trial. X. Pretrial/Trial Issues At this time the parties have not yet discussed any trial issues. XI. Class Action This is not a class action. XII. Related Cases At this time no related cases have been filed.
DATED: February 24, 2010
__________/S/______________________ NATALIE K. WIGHT Special Assistant United States Attorney __________/S/______________________ JOSEPH D. ELFORD Attorney for Claimant Gary Ciciriello
DATED: February 24, 2010
JOINT CMC STATEMENT C 09-3963-EMC
3
1 2 3 4 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
JOINT CMC STATEMENT C 09-3963-EMC
[PROPOSED] ORDER Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties in the Joint CMC Statement and for good cause shown, the Case Management Conference currently scheduled for Wednesday, March 3, 2010, at 4/21/10 at 2:30 p.m. A joint cmc statement 2:30 p.m., is hereby vacated, and is continued until ___________________________________. shall be filed by 4/14/10.
UNIT ED
3/1/ ____ Dated:_______2010 _____
__________________________________ HONORABLE EDWARD M. CHEN ED United States MagistrateRDER O O Judge S
rd M. C hen
S
S DISTRICT TE C TA
RT U O
ER
N
F D IS T IC T O R
A
C
LI
4
FO
dwa Judge E
R NIA
IT IS DIFIED AS MO
NO
RT
H
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?