Free Status Report - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 31.5 kB
Pages: 6
Date: March 22, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 1,349 Words, 8,192 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22962/30.pdf

Download Status Report - District Court of Connecticut ( 31.5 kB)


Preview Status Report - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:03-cv-01032-SRU

Document 30

Filed 03/23/2004

Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : : ONE PARCEL OF PROPERTY : LOCATED AT 62 CUTLER STREET, : NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT, : WITH ALL APPURTENANCES AND : IMPROVEMENTS THEREON, AND : : Defendant. : : [CLAIMANTS: ROBERT A. VENTURINI, : JR., ADAM T. HYDE, STATE OF : CONNECTICUT, CITY OF NEW : LONDON] :

Civil No. 3:03CV1032 (SRU)

March 22, 2004

STATUS REPORT OF THE UNITED STATES Pursuant to the Court's Order dated March 3, 2004, the Plaintiff, United States of America, hereby submits its Status Report. A. OVERVIEW OF THE CASE 1. This is a civil action in rem brought to enforce the provision of 21 U.S.C. §

881(a)(7) for the forfeiture of real property which was used or intended to be used in any manner or part to commit or to facilitate the commission of a violation of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. §§ 801 et seq. This action is related to United States of America v. 171 Lincoln Avenue, New London, Connecticut, Civil No. 3:03CV1033 (SRU), and United States of America v. 38 Jefferson

Case 3:03-cv-01032-SRU

Document 30

Filed 03/23/2004

Page 2 of 6

Avenue, New London, Connecticut, Civil No. 3:03CV1031 (SRU), which are also pending before the Court. 2. The disputed issues in this case are whether the subject property was used to

facilitate illegal drug trafficking activities, and whether the record owner, Claimant, Robert A. Venturini, Jr., had knowledge of any illegal activity at the Defendant Property. 3. No discovery has been taken to date. The Plaintiff, United State of America, and the

incarcerated pro se Claimant, Robert A. Venturini, Jr., had previously entered into an oral agreement to resolve this case and the related case entitled United States v. 171 Lincoln Avenue, New London, Connecticut, Civil No. 3:03CV1033 (SRU). The pro se Claimant has refused to execute Stipulations for Compromise Settlement and is now attempting to make changes the terms of the original agreement which are unacceptable to the United States. 4. Since the Claimant in this civil case, Robert A. Venturini, Jr., is incarcerated in a

state facility and unrepresented by counsel, the United States is uncertain what the Court can do to facilitate a resolution of this case. Moreover, the Claimant has not taken any steps to appear pro se or otherwise defend this action.

B.

SETTLEMENT 1. As mentioned above, undersigned counsel for the Plaintiff, United States of

America, and the pro se Claimant, Robert A. Venturini, Jr., had reached a settlement agreement in this case and the related case entitled United States v. 171 Lincoln Avenue, New London, Connecticut, Civil No. 3:03CV1033 (SRU). However, the pro se Claimant has refused to sign

2

Case 3:03-cv-01032-SRU

Document 30

Filed 03/23/2004

Page 3 of 6

Stipulations for Compromise Settlement prepared by the Plaintiff and is attempting to change the terms of the original agreement. The original agreement to resolve these related cases was made in conjunction with the state criminal case against Mr. Venturini. On September 5, 2003, Robert A. Venturini, Jr., who was represented by three (3) criminal attorneys in his state criminal case, pleaded guilty in the Superior Court for the Judicial District of New London to possession with intent to sell in violation of C.G.S. § 21a-277a, and sentenced to serve 10 years incarceration and 8 years of special parole. During the plea and sentencing hearing, Mr. Venturini was questioned in detail by the presiding judge about his plea to the state charges and his agreement in related federal civil forfeiture actions. Mr. Venturini confirmed at this hearing his agreement with the United States. Despite his acknowledgment of the settlement agreement in open court in his state criminal case, Mr. Venturini refused to sign the Stipulations for Compromise Settlement to resolve this case and the related case against 171 Lincoln Avenue. Undersigned counsel spoke with Mr. Venturini on several occasions from his state correctional facility in an attempt to resolve these matters. After several conversations with Mr. Venturini were unsuccessful, undersigned counsel contacted Attorney Mark Solak, who was one of the attorneys who represented Mr. Venturini in his state criminal case, to obtain his assistance in counseling his client. Attorney Solak indicated to me that he met with Mr. Venturini in person at the correctional facility to counsel him as to the terms of his global agreement with the State's Attorney's Office and the related federal forfeiture actions. Attorney Solak indicated that despite his efforts, Mr. Venturini continued to refuse to abide by the terms of the original agreement. 3

Case 3:03-cv-01032-SRU

Document 30

Filed 03/23/2004

Page 4 of 6

2. 3.

There have been no settlement conferences in this case. As stated above, the Claimant, Robert A. Venturini, Jr., is incarcerated in a state

facility, unrepresented by counsel, and has failed to formally appear pro se in this case or answer or otherwise defend in this action. These circumstances make it difficult to conduct any type of settlement conference or assignment to special master. See Section C(3) below for what additional discovery or motion practice is necessary to facilitate a resolution of this case.

C.

TRIAL PREPARATION 1. In light of the above-described complications, should this case go to trial, it would

not be ready for six months to a year. 2. If this matter is not disposed of either by settlement, or by default of the Claimant

discussed below, additional time will be needed to go through the civil litigation process, including written interrogatories and requests for production of documents and depositions, as well as the dispositive motion stage. In addition, the United States will need to interview and depose witnesses, many of whom were co-defendants of Mr. Venturini in the state criminal case, in preparation for trial. 3. The Plaintiff, United States of America, is making another attempt to reach out to

Mr. Venturini in an effort to resolve this and the related forfeiture action. If after a few weeks Mr. Venturini fails to comply with the terms of the original agreement or otherwise defend, the United States will seek to reinstate the Default against Mr. Venturini that was entered on August 20, 2003 for failure to file a statement of interest or answer or otherwise defend as provided for in Rule C of the Supplemental Rules Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims. The United States 4

Case 3:03-cv-01032-SRU

Document 30

Filed 03/23/2004

Page 5 of 6

moved to set aside the default in September, 2003 because of the agreement Mr. Venturini and the United States had reached. Once the Default is reinstated, the United States will seek a Default Judgment against Claimant, Robert A. Venturini, Jr., and a Motion for Decree of Forfeiture in this case and the related case to forfeit both properties to the United States. Respectfully submitted, PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA KEVIN J. O'CONNOR UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

DATE

BY: JULIE G. TURBERT ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY P.O. BOX 1824 NEW HAVEN, CT 06508 (203) 821-3700 FEDERAL BAR # ct23398

5

Case 3:03-cv-01032-SRU

Document 30

Filed 03/23/2004

Page 6 of 6

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that a copy of the within in and foregoing Status Report of the United States has been mailed, postage prepaid, on this 22nd day of March, 2004, to: Robert Venturini, Jr., pro se Reg. No. 250620 Osborn Correctional Institution 100 Bilton Road, POB 100 Somers, CT 06071 Mark Solak, Esq. Devine & Associates One Exchange Place, 6th Floor Waterbury, CT 06702 Gary G. Williams Assistant Attorney General P.O. Box 120 Hartford, CT 06141 (Counsel for State of Connecticut) Brian K. Estep, Esq. Conway & Londregan, P.C. 38 Huntington Street New London, CT 06320 (Counsel for City of New London) Richard R. Brown, Esq. Brown, Paindiris & Scott 100 Pearl Street Suite 1100 Hartford, CT 06103 (Counsel for Adam T. Hyde)

JULIE G. TURBERT ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY P.O. BOX 1824 NEW HAVEN, CT 06508 (203) 821-3700 FEDERAL BAR # ct23398