Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. Approximately $40,000.00 in U.S. Currency, 2:16-cv-00577-MCE-CKD. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160518922 Visitors: 2
Filed: May 17, 2016
Latest Update: May 17, 2016
Summary: FINAL JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr. , District Judge . Pursuant to the Stipulation for Final Judgment of Forfeiture, the Court finds: 1. This is a civil action in rem brought against Approximately $40,000.00 in U.S. Currency, (hereafter "defendant currency"), which was seized on October 27, 2015. 2. A Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem ("Complaint") was filed on March 18, 2016, alleging that said defendant currency is subject to forfeiture to the United States
More

FINAL JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE

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

1. This is a civil action in rem brought against Approximately $40,000.00 in U.S. Currency, (hereafter "defendant currency"), which was seized on October 27, 2015.

2. A Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem ("Complaint") was filed on March 18, 2016, alleging that said defendant currency is subject to forfeiture to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6).

3. On March 21, 2016, the Clerk issued a Warrant for Arrest for the defendant currency, and that warrant was duly executed on March 22, 2016.

4. Beginning on March 24, 2016, for at least 30 consecutive days, the United States published Notice of the Forfeiture Action on the official internet government forfeiture site www.forfeiture.gov. A Declaration of Publication was filed on April 25, 2016.

5. In addition to the public notice on the official internet government forfeiture site www.forfeiture.gov, actual notice or attempted notice was given to the following individual(s): Deon Lamont Robinson.

6. Claimant filed a claim alleging an interest in the defendant currency on May 9, 2016. No other parties have filed claims or answers in this matter, and the time in which any person or entity may file a claim and answer has expired.

Based on the above findings, and the files and records of the Court, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Court adopts the Stipulation for Final Judgment of Forfeiture entered into by and between the parties to this action.

2. Judgment is hereby entered against claimant Deon Lamont Robinson and all other potential claimants who have not filed claims in this action.

3. Upon entry of a Final Judgment of Forfeiture, $25,000.00 of the $40,000.00 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.

4. Upon entry of a Final Judgment of Forfeiture herein, but no later than 60 days thereafter, $15,000.00 of the $40,000.00 in U.S. Currency shall be returned to claimant Deon Lamont Robinson.

5. The United States 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, arrest, 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, arrest, or forfeiture, as well as to those now known or disclosed. The claimant waives the provisions of California Civil Code § 1542.

6. Claimant Deon Lamont Robinson waives any and all claim or right to interest that may have accrued on the defendant currency.

7. All parties are to bear their own costs and attorneys' fees.

8. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, Hon. Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of this Final Judgment of Forfeiture.

9. Based upon the allegations set forth in the Complaint filed March 18, 2016, and the Stipulation for Final 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 and arrest of the defendant currency, and for the commencement and prosecution of this forfeiture action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer