Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-mc-00158/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-mc-00158-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 625
Nature of Suit: Drug Related Seizure of Property
Cause of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case

---

1 Consent Judgment of Forfeiture 

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 

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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

APPROXIMATELY $17,980.00 IN U.S. 

CURRENCY, 

 Defendant. 

 2:15-MC-00158-KJM-KJN 

CONSENT JUDGMENT OF 

FORFEITURE 

 

Pursuant to the Stipulation for Consent Judgment of Forfeiture, the Court finds: 

1. On July 1, 2015, agents with the Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) contacted 

Johnny Raymond Medina (“Medina” or “Claimant”) at the Sacramento International Airport in 

Sacramento, California. Approximately $17,980.00 in U.S. Currency (“defendant currency”) was 

seized from Medina during this encounter. 

2. The DEA commenced administrative forfeiture proceedings, sending direct written 

notice to all known potential claimants and publishing notice to all others. On or about September 8, 

2015, the DEA received a claim from Medina asserting an ownership interest in the defendant currency. 

3. For the purposes of this settlement only, the Claimant does not dispute the United 

States’ representation that it could show at a forfeiture trial the following: On July 1, 2015, agents 

with the DEA received information regarding a suspicious ticket purchase by Medina and Anthony 

Michael Matta (“Matta”). Law enforcement agents responded to the terminal, observed Medina and 

PHILLIP A. TALBERT 

Acting United States Attorney 

KEVIN C. KHASIGIAN 

Assistant U.S. Attorney 

501 I Street, Suite 10-100 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Telephone: (916) 554-2700 

Attorneys for the United States 

Case 2:15-mc-00158-KJM-KJN Document 10 Filed 06/14/16 Page 1 of 4
2 Consent Judgment of Forfeiture 

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 

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 

Matta exit the flight and made contact with them. A law enforcement agent approached Medina and 

Matta and requested permission to speak with them. Medina and Matta consented. 

4. For the purposes of this settlement only, the Claimant does not dispute the United 

States’ representation that it could show at a forfeiture trial that the law enforcement agent asked and 

received consent from Medina and Matta to search their luggage. The search of Matta’s bag revealed 

no contraband. Upon the search of Medina’s bag, agents found several stacks of cash. Agents asked 

who the money belonged to and both Medina and Matta stated that the defendant currency belonged 

to both of them. Agents then asked Medina and Matta to accompany them to a quiet room where 

they could discuss the legitimacy of the defendant currency. Once inside the room, Matta changed 

his story and told the agents that none of the money belonged to him, only Medina. 

5. For the purposes of this settlement only, the Claimant does not dispute the United 

States’ representation that it could show at a forfeiture trial that the defendant currency was presented 

to a drug-detection dog who positively alerted to the smell of narcotics on the currency. 

6. For the purposes of this settlement only, the Claimant does not dispute the United 

States could further show at a forfeiture trial that Medina has a criminal history that includes an arrest 

for possession of marijuana for sale in 2009. 

7. For the purposes of this settlement only, the Claimant does not dispute the United 

States could further show at a forfeiture trial that the defendant currency is forfeitable to the United 

States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6). 

8. Without admitting the truth of the factual assertions contained above, Claimant 

specifically denying the same, and for the purpose of reaching an amicable resolution and compromise 

of this matter, Claimant agrees that an adequate factual basis exists to support forfeiture of the 

defendant currency. Medina hereby acknowledges that he is the sole owner of the defendant currency, 

and that no other person or entity has any legitimate claim of interest therein. Should any person or 

entity institute any kind of claim or action against the government with regard to its forfeiture of the 

defendant currency, Claimant shall hold harmless and indemnify the United States, as set forth below. 

9. This Court has jurisdiction in this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1345 and 1355, as this 

is the judicial district in which acts or omissions giving rise to the forfeiture occurred. 

Case 2:15-mc-00158-KJM-KJN Document 10 Filed 06/14/16 Page 2 of 4
3 Consent Judgment of Forfeiture 

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 

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 

10. This Court has venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1395, as this is the judicial district in 

which the defendant currency was seized. 

11. The parties herein desire to settle this matter pursuant to the terms of a duly executed 

Stipulation for Consent Judgment of Forfeiture. 

Based upon the above findings, and the files and records of the Court, it is hereby ORDERED 

AND ADJUDGED: 

 12. The Court adopts the Stipulation for Consent Judgment of Forfeiture entered into by 

and between the parties. 

13. Upon entry of this Consent Judgment of Forfeiture, $11,980.00 of the Approximately 

$17,980.00 in U.S. Currency, together with any interest that may have accrued on the total amount 

seized, shall be forfeited to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6), to be disposed of 

according to law. 

14. Upon entry of this Consent Judgment of Forfeiture, but no later than 60 days thereafter, 

$6,000.00 of the Approximately $17,980.00 in U.S. Currency shall be returned to claimant Johnny 

Raymond Medina through his attorney Danny D. Brace. 

15. The United States of America and its servants, agents, and employees and all other 

public entities, their servants, agents and employees, are released from any and all liability arising out 

of or in any way connected with the seizure or forfeiture of the defendant currency. This is a full and 

final release applying to all unknown and unanticipated injuries, and/or damages arising out of said 

seizure or forfeiture, as well as to those now known or disclosed. Claimant waived the provisions of 

California Civil Code § 1542. 

16. No portion of the stipulated settlement, including statements or admissions made 

therein, shall be admissible in any criminal action pursuant to Rules 408 and 410(a)(4) of the Federal 

Rules of Evidence. 

17. All parties will bear their own costs and attorney’s fees. 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 2:15-mc-00158-KJM-KJN Document 10 Filed 06/14/16 Page 3 of 4
4 Consent Judgment of Forfeiture 

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 

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 

 18. Pursuant to the Stipulation for Consent Judgment of Forfeiture filed herein, the Court 

enters this Certificate of Reasonable Cause pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2465, that there was reasonable 

cause for the seizure of the above-described defendant currency. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: June 14, 2016 

Case 2:15-mc-00158-KJM-KJN Document 10 Filed 06/14/16 Page 4 of 4