United States of America v. Approximately $139,740 In United States Currency

Filing 13

STIPULATION AND ORDER Staying Case until 1/20/11. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 10/22/10. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/22/2010)

United States of America v. Approximately $139,740 In United States Currency

Doc. 13

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

MELINDA HAAG (CSBN 132612) United States Attorney J. DOUGLAS WILSON (DCBN 412811) Acting Chief, Criminal Division DAVID B. COUNTRYMAN (CSBN 226995) Assistant United States Attorney 450 Golden Gate Avenue, 11th Floor San Francisco, CA 94102 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 415.436.7234 Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for United States of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) APPROXIMATELY $139,740 IN UNITED ) ) STATES CURRENCY, ) ) Defendant. ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

No. 10- 0186 TEH STIPULATION TO STAY AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Potential claimant Noni Alexander, by and through her counsel of record Randy Sue Pollock, and potential claimant Brandon Johnson, by and through his counsel of record Jai Gohel, and Assistant United States Attorney David Countryman, hereby jointly agree to stay the instant case. Potential Claimant Johnson has a related criminal charges pending in Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania [Case No. 09-cr-00535] and both Johnson and Alexander have a pending prosecution in Alameda County Superior Court [Case No. 553400A]. The preliminary hearing setting conference in Alameda is currently set for December 1, 2010. Docket No. 10. The currency at issue in this forfeiture was seized during the arrest in the

Dockets.Justia.com

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

Alameda County case, which is trailing the federal criminal case in Pennsylvania. The allegations in the present forfeiture complaint are related to the allegations at issue in the related criminal indictments and, consequently, the parties agree that a stay in the forfeiture proceeding for 90 days is necessary, because continuation of the forfeiture proceeding will burden the right of the claimant against self-incrimination in the related criminal cases and will adversely affect the prosecution of the related criminal case.

IT IS SO STIPULATED:

MELINDA HAAG United States Attorney

Dated: October 19, 2010

/S/ DAVID COUNTRYMAN Assistant United States Attorney

Dated: October 19, 2010

/S/ RANDY SUE POLLOCK, ESQ. Attorney for Potential Claimant Noni Alexander

Dated: October 19, 2010

/S/ JAI MANHAR GOHEL, ESQ. Attorney for Potential Claimant Brandon Johnson

ORDER GRANTING STAY UPON CONSIDERATION of the Stipulation to Stay, the entire record, and for good October cause shown, it is by the Court on this 22 day of ______________, 2010. ORDERED that the instant case be, and hereby is, STAYED, until _________________, January 20, 2011 2011, at ______________________ pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(g).
S
S DISTRICT TE C TA

RT U O

ER

N

F D IS T IC T O R

A

C

LI

Stipulation to Stay

2

FO

. He helton E Judge T

nderson

R NIA

HONORABLE THELTON E. HENDERSON United States District Judge
NO

UNIT ED

RT
H