Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00419/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00419-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 625
Nature of Suit: Drug Related Seizure of Property
Cause of Action: 21:881 Forfeiture Property-Drugs

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8500

SIMMERLY ROAD, COVELO, MENDOCINO

COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APN: 033-

030-04-00, 033-040-33-00, 032-

226-03-00, 032-226-04-00, 032-

226-05-00, INCLUDING ALL

APPURTENANCES AND IMPROVEMENTS

THERETO,

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:06-cv-0419 OWW DLB

ORDER AFTER SCHEDULING

CONFERENCE 

Further Scheduling

Conference Date: 11/9/06

8:45 Ctrm. 3

I. Date of Scheduling Conference.

August 16, 2006.

II. Appearances Of Counsel.

Stephanie Hamilton Borchers, Esq., Assistant United States

Attorney, appeared on behalf of Plaintiff.

Ean Vizzi, Esq., appeared on behalf of Claimants Benjamin

Lomax and Adrian Vasquez. 

David M. Michael, Esq., appeared on behalf of Claimant

Rebecca Giauque.

Case 1:06-cv-00419-OWW -DLB Document 23 Filed 08/21/06 Page 1 of 6
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

2

III. Summary of Pleadings. 

1. This is an in rem civil forfeiture action. In its

Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem, the government alleges

that the Defendant real property was used or intended to be used,

in any manner or part, to commit, or facilitate the commission of

violations of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 846,

offenses punishable by more than one year’s imprisonment and is

subject to forfeiture to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C.

§ 881(a)(7). On September 8, 2005, a Grand Jury in the Eastern

District of California indicted David Lee Crossley, Gabriel

Jedidiah Schoenstein, Freddie Delgado, Benjamin Lomax, and others

with violations of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 846

- Conspiracy to Manufacture, to Distribute and Possess with the

Intent to Distribute Marijuana among other related drug charges. 

The criminal case United States v. David Lee Crossley, et al.,

1:05-cr-0315 OWW is pending. Plaintiff filed its Verified

Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem on April 12, 2006. On June 5,

2006, the Defendant real property was posted with copies of the

complaint and notice of the complaint.

2. On May 12, 2006, Benjamin Lomax filed a Verified Claim

in this action. On May 19, 2006, Adrian Vasquez filed a Verified

Claim in this action. On May 25, 2006, the government granted a

30 day extension of time for Benjamin Lomax and Adrian Vasquez to

file their answers in this action. On July 6, 2006, the

government granted an additional three week extension of time for

Benjamin Lomax and Adrian Vasquez. Benjamin Lomax and Adrian

Vasquez intend to file answers to the complaint by August 11,

2006.

Case 1:06-cv-00419-OWW -DLB Document 23 Filed 08/21/06 Page 2 of 6
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

3

3. On or about May 22, 2006, Rebecca Giauque, both

individually and as the conservator of the estate of Chris

Giauque, filed a verified claim in this action. On May 25, 2006,

the government granted an extension in time for Rebecca Giauque

to file her answer in this action. Rebecca Giauque filed her

answer in this action on August 7, 2006. 

4. On June 2, 2006, an Interlocutory Sale of the Defendant

real property took place pursuant to the Stipulation and Order

for Interlocutory Sale of Defendant Property filed with the court

of May 25, 2006. Accordingly, this action now proceeds against

the substitute res.

5. To date, no other potential claimants have filed a

claim or answer in this action. 

IV. Orders Re Amendments To Pleadings.

1. The parties do not anticipate filing any amendments to

the pleadings at this time. 

V. Factual Summary.

A. Admitted Facts Which Are Deemed Proven Without Further

Proceedings. 

1. It is undisputed that the United States Marsha’s

Service posted the Defendant real property located at 8500

Simmerly Road, Covelo, California, on June 5, 2006. 

B. Contested Facts.

1. Plaintiff contends the facts are as alleged in the

verified complaint. 

2. Claimant Benjamin Lomax contends the acts and

omissions potentially giving rise to this forfeiture occurred in

the Northern District of California, not the Eastern District of

Case 1:06-cv-00419-OWW -DLB Document 23 Filed 08/21/06 Page 3 of 6
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

4

California; claimant has an innocent ownership interest in the

Defendant real property such that any act or omission which would

have subjected said property to forfeiture was committed or

omitted without claimant’s knowledge or consent; said seizure of

claimant’s property constitutes an unconstitutional excessive

fine and/or cruel and unusual punishment; said search and

subsequent seizure of evidence from property constituted an

unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the Fourth

amendment of the United States Constitution.

3. Claimant Adrian Vasquez contends: the acts and

omissions potentially giving rise to this forfeiture occurred in

the Northern District of California, not in the Eastern District

of California; claimant has an innocent ownership interest in the

Defendant real property such that any act or omission which would

have subjected said property to forfeiture was committed or

omitted without claimant’s knowledge or consent; said seizure of

claimant’s property constitutes an unconstitutional excessive

fine and/or cruel and unusual punishment; said search and

subsequent seizure of evidence from the property constituted and

unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the Fourth

Amendment of the United States Constitution.

4. Claimant Rebecca Giauque contends: Claimant joins

in the contentions of claimants, Benjamin Lomax and Adrian

Vasquez. Furthermore, both individually, and as the conservator

of the estate of Chris Giauque, claimant contends that the

allegations in the complaint for forfeiture are false and, that,

notwithstanding, claimant is an innocent owner of her interest in

the seized property.

Case 1:06-cv-00419-OWW -DLB Document 23 Filed 08/21/06 Page 4 of 6
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

5

VI. Legal Issues.

A. Uncontested.

1. The parties do not agree that jurisdiction exists

under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334, 1355 and 21 U.S.C. § 881. 

2. Claimants dispute venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1395.

3. Under 21 U.S.C. § 881(j) venue is also claimed. 

B. Contested. 

1. Claimant, Rebecca Giauque asserts 17 affirmative

defenses as are set forth in her answer to Complaint for

forfeiture. 

VII. Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction.

1. The parties have not consented to transfer the 

case to the Magistrate Judge for all purposes, including trial.

VIII. Corporate Identification Statement.

1. Any nongovernmental corporate party to any action in

this court shall file a statement identifying all its parent

corporations and listing any entity that owns 10% or more of the

party's equity securities. A party shall file the statement with

its initial pleading filed in this court and shall supplement the

statement within a reasonable time of any change in the

information. 

IX. Further Scheduling Conference.

1. A further scheduling conference is set for November 9,

2006, at 8:45 a.m. in Courtroom 3. The parties who are in the

Northern District may appear telephonically. The parties

understand that this case must await outcome of proceedings in

///

///

Case 1:06-cv-00419-OWW -DLB Document 23 Filed 08/21/06 Page 5 of 6
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

6

the underlying criminal case which is United States v. Crossley,

et al. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 17, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00419-OWW -DLB Document 23 Filed 08/21/06 Page 6 of 6