United States of America v. Approximately $214,225 in United States Currency
Filing
44
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS SHOULD NOT BE DENIED.Show Cause Response due by 12/18/2017.Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on December 12, 2017. (dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/12/2017)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
8
9
10
11
Case No. 17-cv-02891-DMR
v.
APPROXIMATELY $214,225 IN UNITED
STATES CURRENCY,
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS
SHOULD NOT BE DENIED
Re: Dkt. No. 40
13
On November 17, 2017, Claimant Dejanique Blackwell (“Claimant”) filed a motion to
14
suppress in this civil forfeiture action. [Docket No. 40]. In the motion, Claimant averred facts in
15
support of the motion, but submitted no declaration attesting to those facts. Instead, Claimant
16
asserted that the facts would be “amplified” by sworn testimony. Mot. at 3 (“Here it is further
17
being contended that the facts (when amplified with sworn testimony which will envelop the
18
averments made below) will show . . .”). Plaintiff United States of America (“Plaintiff”) filed a
19
timely opposition in which it argued that the facts of the motion were undisputed due to the
20
absence of sworn facts proffered by Claimant. [Docket No. 42]. Claimant did not file a reply.
21
In light of the above, the court orders Claimant to show cause in writing by no later than
22
December 18, 2017 why the motion to suppress should not be denied for failure to provide sworn
23
facts. Failure to respond to this order may result in denial of the motion to suppress.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
S
______________________________________
yu
on
Donna na M. R
Judge D M. Ryu
United States Magistrate Judge
E
NO
27
ERED
O ORD
IT IS S
RN
A
H
28
LI
RT
FO
Dated: December 12, 2017
26
RT
U
O
25
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
R NIA
24
UNIT
ED
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Defendant.
12
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
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?