Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02501/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02501-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Maricela Aceves
Claimant
Approximately $18,000.00 seized from Chase Bank account number 3121639956
Defendant
Approximately $5,000.00 in U.S. Currency
Defendant
United States of America
Plaintiff
Mariano Montenegro Vallejo
Claimant

Document Text:

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

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER 

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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

APPROXIMATELY $18,000.00 SEIZED

FROM CHASE BANK ACCOUNT

NUMBER 3121639956, HELD IN THE

NAME OF MARIANO VALLEJO, and

APPROXIMATELY $5,000.00 IN U.S.

CURRENCY, 

 Defendants.

2:12-CV-02501-LKK-GGH

REQUEST FOR STAY OF FURTHER 

PROCEEDINGS AND ORDER 

Plaintiff United States of America, and claimants MARIANO VALLEJO and

MARICELA ACEVES (hereafter, “Claimants”), by and through their respective counsel,

hereby stipulate that a stay is necessary in the above-entitled action, and request that

the Court enter an order staying all further proceedings until the conclusion of the

criminal case against Vallejo.

The related criminal case is UNITED STATES v. MARIANO MONTENEGRO

VALLEJO, Case No. 12-CR-0156-LKK. Claimants have filed claims to the defendant

Approximately $18,000 seized from Chase Bank Account Number 3121639956, held in

the name of Mariano Vallejo and the Approximately $5,000.00 in U.S. Currency

1 Stipulation to Stay Proceedings

Case 2:12-cv-02501-JAM-DB Document 18 Filed 11/28/12 Page 1 of 4
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

(collectively "defendant funds") .1 On April 19, 2012, the Grand Jury of the Eastern

District of California indicted Mariano Vallejo for violations of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) -

Distribution of Cocaine & Methamphetamine, and 21 U.S.C. § 861(a) - Use of Person

Under 18 Years of Age in Drug Operation. The stay is requested pursuant to 18 U.S.C.

§§ 981(g)(1), 981(g)(2), and 21 U.S.C. § 881(i). The United States contends that the

defendant funds were money furnished and intended to be furnished in exchange for a

controlled substance and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6). In

addition the United States contends that deposits were structured so as to avoid the

currency transaction requirements of 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a)(3). As such the United States

alleges that the defendant funds were the proceeds of or involved in a violation of 31

U.S.C. § 5324 and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 984 and 31 U.S.C. §

5317(c)(2). 

The defense invokes Mr. Vallejo’s rights under the Fifth Amendment not to

incriminate himself in filing a claim, answering the complaint or sitting for a

deposition. The United States intends to depose any claimants regarding their claims

and their involvement in and/or knowledge of drug trafficking and other facts as alleged

in the complaint. The claimants will likely seek to depose law enforcement officers who

have been involved in the drug-trafficking investigation, which is also the basis for the

pending criminal case. 

If discovery proceeds at this time, Mr. Vallejo will be placed in the difficult

position of either invoking his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and

losing the ability to pursue his claims to the defendant real property, or waiving his

Fifth Amendment rights and submitting to depositions and potentially incriminating

himself. If he invokes his Fifth Amendment rights, the United States will be deprived of

the ability to explore the factual basis for the claims they filed with this court in this

action. In addition, to the extent Claimants intend to depose, among others, the agents

1

 Claimants have not yet filed their Answers and will not be required to do so until the

stay contemplated by this stipulation expires.

2 Stipulation to Stay Proceedings

Case 2:12-cv-02501-JAM-DB Document 18 Filed 11/28/12 Page 2 of 4
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

involved in the underlying investigation, allowing depositions of the law enforcement

officers at this time would adversely affect the United States’ prosecution of the

criminal case against Vallejo and disclose the identity of a confidential informant.

The parties recognize that proceeding with this action at this time has potential

adverse effects on the prosecution of the underlying criminal case and/or upon the

ability of Claimants to prove their claims to the defendant funds and to assert any

defenses to the forfeiture. For these reasons, the parties jointly request that this matter

be stayed until the conclusion of the criminal case. At that time the parties will advise

the court on the status of the related cases and whether a further stay is necessary.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: 11/26/12 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

By: /s/ Kevin S. Khasgian__

KEVIN S. KHASIGIAN

Assistant United States Attorney

DANIEL J. BRODERICK

Federal Defender

Dated 11/26/12 /s/ Courtney Fein 

COURTNEY FEIN

Assistant Federal Defender

RACHELLE BARBOUR

Research and Writing Attorney

Attorneys for MARIANO VALLEJO

(Authorized via email 11/26/12)

Dated 11/26/12 /s/ Maricela Aceves 

MARICELA ACEVES

Appearing in Propria Persona

(Authorized via telephone 11/26/12)

///

///

///

///

3 Stipulation to Stay Proceedings

Case 2:12-cv-02501-JAM-DB Document 18 Filed 11/28/12 Page 3 of 4
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

O R D E R

For the reasons set forth above, this action is stayed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §

981(g)(1), 18 U.S.C. § 981(g)(2), and 21 U.S.C. § 881(i) until the conclusion of the

criminal case, at which time the parties will advise the Court whether a further

stay is necessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 27, 2012.

4 Stipulation to Stay Proceedings

Case 2:12-cv-02501-JAM-DB Document 18 Filed 11/28/12 Page 4 of 4