Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Robinson

United States District Court, E.D. California

July 17, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
BRIAN ROBINSON, KIMBERLY SANTIAGO ROBINSON, CUC THI SCHAEFFER, JOHN ACOSTA, ANTONIO BENITEZ GONZALEZ, Defendants.

          MCGREGOR W. SCOTT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY MICHELE BECKWITH KEVIN C. KHASIGIAN ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEYS

          MOTION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO DISMISS SECOND SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT

         Pursuant to Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the United States hereby moves to dismiss the Second Superseding Indictment with prejudice, consistent with the Agreement for Dismissal and the Consent Judgment for Forfeiture, both of which are incorporated by reference into this motion. The Second Superseding Indictment contains the only charges pending against the defendants.

         The government's motion to dismiss is contingent upon all parties' execution of the attached Agreement for Dismissal and the Consent Judgment for Forfeiture, and the Court's granting of the motion and adoption of the Consent Judgment for Forfeiture will terminate the case.

         AGREEMENT FOR DISMISSAL

         The United States of America and defendants Brian Robinson, Kimberly Santiago Robinson, Cue Thi Schaeffer, John Acosta, and Antonio Benitez Gonzalez stipulate and agree that the Second Superseding Indictment should be dismissed. The United States will move the court to dismiss the Second Superseding Indictment based on this agreement, which will be appended to the United States' motion for dismissal and become part of the record in this action. Further, provided the defendants abide by the terms of this Agreement and Stipulation for Consent Judgment of Forfeiture, the United States agrees it will not institute new charges arising out of the same operative facts alleged in the Superseding Indictment, Motion to Dismiss, or Stipulation for Consent Judgment of Forfeiture.

         I. CASE HISTORY

         The parties agree and stipulate the following is true:

         1. Since at least 2013, Mr. Robinson has resided in Fairfield, California, in the Eastern District of California, with co-defendant Kimberly Santiago Robinson.

         2. On November 19, 2015, defendants Brian Robinson, Kimberly Santiago Robinson, Cue Thi Schaeffer, John Acosta, and Antonio Benitez Gonzalez were indicted for various criminal drug offenses in the District of Nebraska in case number 8:15-CR-178 (the 'Nebraska Criminal Case"). The Nebraska Criminal Case stemmed from an April 2014 traffic stop in Seward County, Nebraska during which law enforcement found over $380, 000 in cash in defendant Brian Robinson's vehicle.

         3. The government filed two Superseding Indictments in the Nebraska Criminal Case. The Second Superseding Indictment charges Defendant Brian Robinson with the following offenses: (1) conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 1, 000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846; (2) promoting, managing establishing, carrying on, facilitating, or distributing the proceeds of, any unlawful activity, to wit, conspiracy possess with intent to distribute 1, 000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marijuana, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)(1) and (a)(3); and (3) money laundering conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h). Defendant Kimberly Santiago Robinson was charged with drug and money laundering offenses, in violation 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) and 21 U.S.C. § 846. Defendants Cue Thi Schaeffer, John Acosta, and Antonio Benitez Gonzalez were charged with violating 21 U.S.C. § 846.

         4. On or about June 29, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska ordered the transfer of the Nebraska Criminal Case to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 21(b)'s venue provision.

         II. WAIVERS

         5. Defendants Brian Robinson, Kimberly Santiago Robinson, Cue Thi Schaeffer, John Acosta, and Antonio Benitez Gonzalez waive any claims against any party, including but not limited to the United States and all its agencies and employees, arising from the investigation into, or prosecution of, each defendant and their co-defendants. This waiver shall bind their heirs and assigns.

         6. In addition, defendants Brian Robinson, Kimberly Santiago Robinson, Cue Thi Schaeffer, John Acosta, and Antonio Benitez Gonzalez agree that this agreement, including this waiver, shall apply to all unknown and unanticipated results of the transactions and occurrences described above and in the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.