United States v. Real property located at 260 East Flamingo Road, Unit 205 [also known as Unit 233], Las Vegas, Nevada, 89169

Filing 67

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that based on the joint status report at ECF No. 66 , an additional joint status report is due on 6/17/2022. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler on 12/17/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - YAW)

Download PDF
Case 2:15-cv-00350-APG-BNW Document 66 Filed 12/16/21 Page 1 of 5 67 12/17/21 1 Aleem A. Dhalla, Bar No. 14188 SNELL & WILMER L.L.P. 2 3883 Howard Hughes Pkwy., Suite 1100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169 3 Telephone: 702-784-5200 Facsimile: 702-784-5252 4 Email: adhalla@swlaw.com 5 David L. McGee (Admited Pro Hac Vice) 6 BEGGS & LANE, RLLP 501 Commendencia Street 7 Pensacola, Florida 32502 Telephone: 850-432-2451 8 Facsimilie: 850-469-3331 Email: dlm@beggslane.com 9 Attorneys for Claimant Charles Burton Ritchie 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 12 13 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, 14 15 v. 16 REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 260 EAST FLAMINGO ROAD, UNIT NO. 17 205 [ALSO KNOWN AS UNIT NO. 233], LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89169 MORE 18 PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS: 19 PARCEL I: 20 UNIT TWO HUNDRED THIRTY-THREE (233) (“UNIT”) IN BUILDING FOUR (4) 21 (“BUILDING”) AS SHOWN ON THE FINAL PLAT OF THE MERIDIAN AT 22 HUGHES CENTER, FILED IN BOOK 49 OF PLATS, PAGE 40, IN THE OFFICIAL 23 RECORDS OF THE COUNTY RECORDER, CLARK COUNTY, 24 NEVADA (“PLAT”), AND AS DEFINED AND SET FORTH IN AND SUBJECT TO 25 THAT CERTAIN DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND 26 RESTRICTIONS FOR THE MERIDIAN AT HUGHES CENTER, RECORDED 27 JUNE 1, 2005 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 0001551 IN BOOK 20050601 OFFICIAL 28 RECORDS, CLARK COUNTY NEVADA Case No: 2:15-CV-350-APG-BNW Fourteenth Status Report Jointly Filed Case 2:15-cv-00350-APG-BNW Document 66 Filed 12/16/21 Page 2 of 5 67 12/17/21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 (“THE MERIDIAN AT HUGHES CENTER DECLARATION”) PARCEL II: TOGETHER WITH AN UNDIVIDED ALLOCATED FRACTIONAL INTEREST IN AND TO THE GENERAL COMMON ELEMENTS, AS SET FORTH IN, AND SUBJECT TO, THE PLAT AND THE MERIDIAN AT HUGHES CENTER DECLARATION. PARCEL III: TOGETHER WITH AN EXCLUSIVE INTEREST IN AND TO THOSE LIMITED COMMON ELEMENTS, IF ANY, APPURTENANT TO THE UNIT, AS SET FORTH IN, AND SUBJECT TO, THE PLAT AND THE MERIDIAN AT HUGHES CENTER DECLARATION. PARCEL IV: TOGETHER WITH A NONEXCLUSIVE EASEMENT OF REASONABLE INGRESS TO AND EGRESS FROM THE UNIT, AND OF ENJOYMENT OF THE GENERAL COMMON ELEMENTS, AS SET FORTH IN, AND SUBJECT TO, THE PLAT AND THE MERIDIAN AT HUGHES CENTER DECLARATION, TOGETHER WITH ALL IMPROVEMENTS AND APPURTENANCES THEREON, APN: 162-16-810-479, Defendant. 21 22 In compliance with this Court’s Order dated July 6, 2021 (ECF No. 59), the counsel 23 for Charles Burton Ritchie (Ritchie) and the government jointly submit the following status 24 report. 25 BACKGROUND 26 On February 27, 2015, the United States filed a civil action seeking the forfeiture of 27 the named real-property defendant. 28 /// 2 Case 2:15-cv-00350-APG-BNW Document 66 Filed 12/16/21 Page 3 of 5 67 12/17/21 Previously, on January 18, 2013 (docketed as 2:13-CV-00100-JCM-EJY), and May 1 2 29, 2013 (docketed as 2:13-CV-00947-JCM-EJY), the United States had filed two forfeiture 3 civil actions seeking the forfeiture of numerous monetary and personal property assets, 4 including currency seized from the accounts of various financial institutions and several 5 automobiles because those assets were deemed to be proceeds of illicit drug trafficking and 6 money laundering activities orchestrated by Ritchie and his conspirators. Since those civil 7 filings, Ritchie and his conspirators were federally indicted, in this district, for multiple 8 violations of criminal laws, primarily 21 U.S.C. § 841 (docketed as United States v. Ritchie, et. 9 al., 2:15-CR-00285-APG-EJY). Ritchie is the principal claimant in the above-captioned civil forfeiture action and is 10 11 also the principal criminal defendant named in the indictment. In addition to identical 12 litigants, the criminal and civil cases involve the same principal issue (to wit: alleged 13 unlawful drug trafficking). Specifically, both the forfeiture complaint and the criminal 14 indictment allege that Ritchie and his confederates trafficked in wholesale quantities of 15 “spice,” an analogue controlled substance. Both the complaint and the indictment further 16 allege that Ritchie and his allies earned millions, if not tens of millions, of dollars in illegal 17 revenues derived from ‘spice’ sales. 18 UPDATE 19 The criminal trial for the District of Nevada concluded July 8, 2019, where Ritchie 20 and Galecki were found guilty of multiple counts, ECF Nos. 439, 449. The Court entered a 21 forfeiture order, ECF No. 455, that included forfeiture of the above property. The case from 22 the Eastern District of Virginia was transferred to the District of Nevada where Ritchie and 23 Galecki plead guilty to a count in the Virginia Information, ECF Nos. 544, 545. The case 24 from the Southern District of Alabama was transferred to the District of Nevada where 25 Ritchie and Galecki plead guilty to a count in the Alabama Indictment, ECF Nos. 527, 536. 26 The two defendants’ changes of plea to both indictments were held September 9, 2020, and 27 the defendants were sentenced for all three cases, ECF No. 588. The Government seeks a 28 /// 3 Case 2:15-cv-00350-APG-BNW Document 66 Filed 12/16/21 Page 4 of 5 67 12/17/21 1 continuation of the above-captioned civil forfeiture action until the conclusion of Ritchie’s 2 criminal case. 3 Galecki filed an appeal on September 16, 2020, ECF No. 594, and Ritchie filed an 4 appeal on September 20, 2020, ECF No. 605. The appeals were consolidated under case 5 number 20-10288. Ritchie and Galecki each submitted an Opening Brief on April 14, 2021. 6 The consolidated Answering Brief was filed August 11, 2021. The Reply Brief was filed 7 October 4, 2021. The appeal is pending. 8 9 In addition, all of the defendant assets in the two consolidated civil cases and the named real-property defendant have been included in the forfeiture allegations of the 10 indictment and Amended Bill of Particulars in United States v. Ritchie, et. al., 2:15-CR-00285- 11 APG-EJY. If forfeiture is completed on the asset specified in this civil forfeiture action as a 12 consequence of the criminal prosecution, continuation of this civil forfeiture will be 13 unnecessary, likely resulting in a voluntary dismissal of this case by the Government. In any 14 event, it will be most efficient and expedient for this Court and the parties to continue to 15 stay the above-captioned civil forfeiture action pending the outcome of the criminal case. 16 The government agreed to this Fourteenth Status Report Jointly Filed. 17 DATED: December 16, 2021. 18 Respectfully submitted, 19 SNELL & WILMER L.L.P, 20 21 22 23 Order /s/ Aleem A. Dhalla Aleem A. Dhalla, Bar No. 14188 SNELL & WILMER L.L.P. 3883 Howard Hughes Pkwy., Suite 1100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169 Telephone: 702-784-5200 Facsimile: 702-784-5252 Email: adhalla@swlaw.com IT IS ORDERED that an additional status report is due on June 17, 2022. IT IS SO ORDERED DATED: 9:27 am, December 17, 2021 24 25 BRENDA WEKSLER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE David L. McGee BEGGS & LANE, RLLP 501 Commendencia Street Pensacola, Florida 32502 Telephone: 850-432-2451 Facsimilie: 850-469-3331 Email: dlm@beggslane.com 26 27 28 4 Case 2:15-cv-00350-APG-BNW Document 66 Filed 12/16/21 Page 5 of 5 67 12/17/21 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that on this date I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of 3 Court for the U.S. District Court, District of Nevada by using the Court’s CM/ECF system. 4 Participants in the case who are registered CM/ECF users will be served by the CM/ECF 5 system. 6 7 DATED: December 16, 2021 8 /s/ D’Andrea Dunn An Employee of Snell & Wilmer L.L.P. 9 10 4885-3188-5062 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5

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?