CHAPTER 8 Criminal Law and Procedure 333 plastic containing axle grease. A total of $2,164,431.00 in cash was found inside the truck. establishing a connection between the currency and A laptop computer was found in the passenger drug crimes. The Court agrees. The method of con- compartment of the truck. When searched pursuant cealment strongly suggests that the Claimant was to a warrant, the laptop was found to contain a ledger attempting to hide the scent of drug-related money that reflects receipts of more than $2 million during from law enforcement. the month of March 2011. The government argues that the positive dog Sometime after the seizure of the money found alert connects the money to illegal drug activity. The in the truck, Claimant returned to Guadalajara. government has presented evidence establishing that Claimant remains in Mexico. Crowe is certified as a patrol and narcotics detection canine. The government submits that Claimant's rental truck contained $2, 164,341 in cash and that posses- The Court concludes that the government has sion of a large amount of cash is strong evidence of a met its burden of providing sufficient evidence to con- connection to illegal activity. Although not alone suf- clude, by a preponderance standard, that the money was used or intended to be used to facilitate a violation ficient to show a connection to illegal drug transac- of federal drug laws. tions, this factor is significant given the large sum of money discovered in this case. The Court concludes that no reasonable trier of fact-jury or judge-could find that Claimant The government argues that the packaging of was carrying the $2, 164,341 in currency for legiti- the money is also relevant. Cellophane is not a nor- mate, non-drug related reasons. The government has mal repository for carrying large amounts of money. carried its burden of showing by a preponderance of Rather cellophane, which is largely impermeable to the evidence that there is a substantial connection gas, is commonly used to conceal the smell of drugs between the money seized and illegal drug activity. and avoid detection by drug dogs. Packaging the Claimant has failed to present evidence that raises a $2,164,341 in bundles, banded with rubber bands, genuine issue of material fact for trial. The govern- wrapped in plastic containing axle grease, is certainly ment is therefore entitled to summary judgment. consistent with efforts to block the odor of drugs and IT IS ORDERED: The government's motion for to conceal the money with an odor-masking grease. summary judgment is granted. Claimant's interest in The government contends that the method of $2,164,341 in U.S. Currency is forfeited to the United States. The Clerk is directed to terminate this action. concealing the bundled currency is another factor VIRTUAL LAW OFFICE EXPERIENCE MODULES VLOE 8.1 Memo listing the criminal code sections, ele- If your instructor has instructed you to ments of the crimes, and conduct observed on complete assignments in the Virtual Law the video indicating violation of these criminal Office program, complete the Virtual statutes Law Office assignments as assigned by your instructor. These assignments are VLOE 8.2 Office memo on ethical rules concerning disclo- designed to develop your workplace sure of a client's admission that they have com- skills. Completing the assignments for this chapter will result mitted a crime n producing the following documents for inclusion in your portfolio:332 PART II Introduction to Law WORKING WITH THE plastic LANGUAGE OF THE in cash COURT CASE United States of America v. $2, 164,341 in U.S. Currency comp to a w 2013 U.S. Dist. Lexis 79696 (2013) that United States District Court for the District of Arizona the m Read the following excerpt from the opinion of the U.S. district court and brief the case. In your brief answer the following questions. in th 3. What elements must be shown for the government Clair 1. Can the United States government sue for the to obtain forfeiture of cash or other property? forfeiture of money? 4. Were these elements found in this case? truc 2. Does a defendant have to be proven guilty of sion a crime before the government can obtain the 5. What remedy was ordered by the court in this cont forfeiture of his or her money or property? case? ficie tion mor Campbell, District Judge the The government has filed a motion for summary that he planned to fly back to Atlanta and have the ma judgment on its forfeiture claim regarding $2, 164,341 new clothing shipped there. Officer Gerard asked Ra seized from Claimant Leonardo Cornejo Reynoso Claimant if the rental truck contained drugs, weap- ga ("Claimant"). During the course of this litigation, the ons, or large amounts of currency. Claimant said it an government repeatedly arranged for Claimant to enter did not. $2 the United States from Mexico in order to be deposed. At the officer's request, Claimant signed a form Claimant repeatedly refused to appear, asserting that consenting to a search of the truck and confirmed he was not willing to enter the United States. that he was responsible for the truck's contents. After In April of 2011, Claimant drove a Budget rental accessing the rear of the truck, Officer Gerard imme- truck on a one-way trip from Atlanta, Georgia, to Los diately smelled a strong odor of dirty clothing and Angeles, California. At approximately 5:00 a.m. on body odor, and found garbage bags containing cloth- April 21, 2011, near Flagstaff, Arizona, a city about ing inside. Officer Gerard inspected a small bag near 700 miles from Los Angeles, Officer Gerard stopped the truck's cab and found that it contained a large bun- Claimant for an unsafe lane change. Claimant pro- dle of money wrapped in plastic. Officer Gerard told duced a Georgia driver's license bearing the name Claimant about the money, and Claimant replied that Leonardo Cornejo-Reynoso and a copy of a Budget he did not think the money was illegal and that it was VI rental agreement which reflected a one-way rental his. When Officer Gerard asked how much money EX from Atlanta to Los Angeles. was in the truck, Claimant said that there was about Officer Gerard explained the reason for the stop two million dollars. Claimant told Officer Gerard that and asked Claimant to step out of the truck while he had the money with him because he planned to he went back to his patrol car to prepare a warning purchase property in California. citation. Claimant did not want to leave the truck. After closing and securing the rear door of the Officer Gerard asked Claimant where he was going, rental truck, Officer Gerard advised Claimant that he and Claimant stated that he was going to Los Angeles skil was not under arrest, that he was under investigative in to donate used clothing and to purchase new cloth- detention, and that DPS would transport the truck to po ing for his Atlanta-area clothing store. Claimant stated that the rental truck contained used clothing. one of its facilities for a more extensive search. At the Officer Gerard asked Claimant why he did not donate DPS facility, Officer Gerard used certified narcotic the clothing in Georgia, and Claimant explained that detention canine Crowe to examine the rental truck he would receive a discount on the new clothing in Crowe positively alerted to the rear of the rental truck exchange for his donation. DPS Sergeant J. Hutton, and to boxes containing the money discovered in the who was assisting Officer Gerard, asked Claimant truck. Officers inventoried the rental truck's contents about the one-way rental, and Claimant explained and found more money concealed inside the bags of used clothing, bound by rubber bands and wrapped in