Case Document 1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 1 of 11 JOHN S. LEONARDO United States Attorney District of Arizona JEFFREY R. BORUP Arizona State Bar Number 027681 Assistant United States Attorneys Two Renaissance Square 40 North Central Avenue, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408 Telephone: (602) 514-7500 E-mail: ieffrev.borup@usdoi .gov Attorneys for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA United States of America, Plaintiff, VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR V. $36,000.00 in United States Currency, Defendant. FORFEITURE IN REM Plaintiff, United States of America, brings this complaint and alleges as follows in accordance with Rule of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions (?Supplemental Rules?): BASIS FOR THE FORFEITURE 1. This is a civil action in rem to forfeit property to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 881(a)(6) because it was furnished or intended to be furnished by a person in exchange for a controlled substance or listed chemical in violation of Title II of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq, or is proceeds traceable to such an exchange, or was used or intended to be used to facilitate a violation of Title II of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq. OOQON Case Document 1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 2 of 11 DEFENDANT IN REM 2. The Defendant consists of $36,000.00 in United States currency (?defendant currency?), seized on April 23, 2015, from Zane Young. The defendant currency is currently in the custody of the United States Marshals Service. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. This Court has jurisdiction over an action commenced by the United States under 28 U.S.C. 1345, and over an action for forfeiture under 28 1355(a). 4. This Court will have in rem jurisdiction over the defendant currency upon the Court's issuance of an arrest warrant in rem pursuant to Supplemental Rule and the execution of said arrest warrant on the defendant currency pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 135 5(d) and Supplemental Rule 5. Venue is proper in this district: a) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. l355(b)(l)(A), because the acts or omissions giving rise to the forfeiture occurred in this district; and b) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1355(b)(1)(B) and 1395(b), because the defendant currency was found in this district, 6. On April 23, 2015, while on duty at the Commercial Narcotics Interdiction Unit located at the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, Phoenix Police Detectives received information from a confidential source regarding an individual traveling on board US. Airways ?ight #671 from Orlando, Florida, with a stop in Phoenix, Arizona, and continuing to Las Vegas, Nevada, on ?ight #608. 7. Flight #671 was scheduled to arrive at Terminal 4, Gate A-29 at 6:54 pm. in Phoenix, Arizona. 8. The one-way ticket was purchased to Las Vegas, Nevada, last minute under the name of Zane Young (hereafter with credit card. 9. YOUNG had no checked bag. Case Document 1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 3 of 11 10. YOUNG was seated in seat on ?ight #671. 11. Investigators ran a criminal history check on YOUNG. A check of federal, state and local law enforcement indices revealed YOUNG had previously been charged with possession of marijuana in Buckeye, possession of marijuana in Tucson. YOUNG had been deported by the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Yuma in 2009. 12. Among their duties at the airport, investigators attempt to identify and interdict money couriers in an effort to disrupt Drug Traf?cking Organizations. These money couriers are often identi?ed by using a variety of resources to include con?dential sources of information, suspicious ?ight itineraries, past criminal histories, information from other law enforcement agencies, last minute ticket purchases, telephone numbers supplied to the airline carrier that are not in service and traveling with minimal or no luggage in addition to other indicators not mentioned. 13. Based on the information received and their knowledge of the drug demand/source relationship between Orlando, Florida, and Phoenix, Arizona, investigators decided to attempt to talk with YOUNG. 14. Investigators arrived at Gate A-29 and stood near the disembarkation door as passengers deplaned ?ight #671. 15. Investigators observed a male exit the plane, consistent With individual who would be seated in seat A 16. Investigators made contact with YOUNG as YOUNG walked down the concourse. Interview of Zane YOUNG 17. Investigators [approached the male passenger matching the physical description of YOUNG, identi?ed themselves and showed the individual, believed to be YOUNG, their-rofficial badges and credentials. 18. Investigators asked if they could talk to him, and the individual agreed. 19. The individual pulled a wheeled bag and wore a back pack. Case Document 1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 4 of 11 20. When investigators asked for his identi?cation and when he purchased the ticket, YOUNG produced an Arizona driver?s license with his photo in the name of Zane Lee YOUNG and stated he purchased his ticket the night before his travel. 21. Investigators asked YOUNG why he was going to Las Vegas. YOUNG stated he had some family in Las Vegas. 22. Young stated he had an apartment in Arizona, where he lived. 23. Investigators asked YOUNG if he had any illegal drugs or contraband or large amounts of money with him. YOUNG replied, as he smiled and gave a little chuckle. i 24. Investigators asked for consent to search bags. YOUNG pushed the wheeled bag toward the investigators and handed investigators the handle. 25. Investigators searched the bag while continuing to speak to YOUNG. 26. YOUNG was still wearing his back pack as he told investigators he was staying in Las Vegas for about a week. 27. Investigators asked YOUNG if they could search his back pack as they continued to talk. YOUNG consented. 28. YOUNG told investigators he was in Florida on both business and pleasure. 29. YOUNG informed investigators he owned a business that bought and sold cars. 30. YOUNG stated he bought cars from a friend in Arizona and sold them. 31. YOUNG told investigators that he (YOUNG) was going to Las Vegas to gamble. A 32. While searching bag, investigators found a large bundle of currency concealed in a pair of rolled-up pants. 33. Investigators asked YOUNG how much he had. YOUNG replied, ?About 20 thousand.? Case Document 1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 5 of 11 34. Investigators asked YOUNG if there was any more money in the bag or if that was all he had. YOUNG told investigators he did not have any more money. 35. Investigators continued to search bag and found more large bundles of currency inside rolled-up pants. 36. YOUNG then told investigators there were 4 or 5 pairs of pants with money in them. 37. Based on deception, travel itinerary and the large amounts of money YOUNG had, investigators asked YOUNG if he would accompany them to the CNIU of?ce located in the airport to talk to them further about the money found by investigators and where they (investigators) could examine the suitcase. 38. YOUNG pulled and carried his bags to the CNIU of?ce. 39. While walking to the CNIU of?ce, YOUNG told investigators he had been in possession of the currency for about a day and that he got the money from selling cars in Florida. 40. Upon arriving at the CNIU of?ce, investigators asked YOUNG if the address on his Arizona ID Was a house or apartment. YOUNG hesitated, looked at the ID carefully and stated it was a house. YOUNG had previously told investigators it was an apartment. See 122. 41. Investigators asked YOUNG for his cellular number. YOUNG removed his phone from his pocket and had to look in the phone?s information to obtain his own cellular phone, which he then provided to investigators as 42. YOUNG previously stated he had about 20 thousand. See 133. 43. YOUNG now stated he actually" had over $36,000, which came from the three cars he sold in Florida: one silver 2009 Buick LaCrosse for $12,000; one 2008 Lexus GS 300 for $15,500, and; one 2010 Honda Civic for $9,000. 44. When asked who he sold the cars to, YOUNG stated he did not actually sell the cars, but a friend of his found customers in Florida to sell them to. Case Document 1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 6 of 11 45. Investigators asked YOUNG what his friend?s name was. YOUNG stated it was, ?Mark,? who he had known for four years. 46. YOUNG could not provide investigators with Mark?s last name. 47. YOUNG provided investigators with Mark?s phone number, 5983. 48. When investigators attempted to call the number, to speak with ?Mark,? no one answered. 49. YOUNG told investigators he did not purchase the three cars from the auction, but purchased the vehicles, ?from Craigslist three weeks ago? and ?shipped them for $800 each to Florida a week ago.? 50. Investigators asked which car carrier company YOUNG used to ship the vehicles. YOUNG could not remember. 51. YOUNG stated he owned a business called Motors in Arizona for the last four years. I 52. YOUNG stated he buys and sells cars through his business Motors. 53. When asked how much he ?led on his income taxes last year for his car selling business, YOUNG could not tell investigators. I 54. YOUNG told investigators he did not ?le his taxes last year or for the last couple of years for his car selling business. 55. YOUNG told investigators that he did not pay taxes when he purchaSed cars off Craigslist. 56. YOUNG stated he sold mostly to car companies so he did not have to pay taxes. I 57. Investigators? records check with Arizona Corporation Commission revealed Motors was active as of June 2011. 58. Motors listed its business address of 9150 W. Cypress with YOUNG listed as the owner. Case Document 1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 7 of 11 59. YOUNG stated he was headed to Las Vegas to gamble with a friend he only knew as ?Miller.? 60. YOUNG provided investigators with a phone number for Miller, however, when investigators called the number, no one answered. 61. YOUNG told investigators his girlfriend ?Meia,? knew he purchased and sold cars and gave investigators her phone number, 62. When investigators called Meia, she was reluctant to acknowledge that she knew YOUNG and told investigators she was not his girlfriend. 63. Meia told investigators she believed YOUNG bought and sold cars, but was not really sure what he did for a living. Canine Examination 64. On June 22, 2015, Phoenix Police Detective Gabrick utilized Certi?ed Narcotic Detection canine ?Dock? to conduct an examination of the currency found in bags. 65. Dock is a three-year old Labrador Retriever, trained and certi?ed to detect the odors of methamphetamine, heroin, cocaine and marijuana. Only certi?ed with NNDA. 66. Dock is currently certi?ed with the National Narcotic Detector Dog Association (NNDDA), and last certi?ed in August 2015. If at anytime during. the examination Dock smells one of the odors he is trained to detect, Dock will alert by scratching and/or biting at the area where he smells the odor. Detective Gabrick is Dock?s only handler. The search was conducted in the CNIU of?ce area. 67. Detective Gabrick chose to conduct the examination in the far east room of the CNIU of?ce. The room contains numerous items, including desks, chairs, ?ling cabinets, computers and a refrigerator. 68. Prior to using'Dock to conduct a sniff of the currency, Detective Gabrick had Dock inspect the area in which the currency was to be placed. Case Document 1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 8 of 11 69. Detective Gabrick removed Dock from his kennel and brought him into the area and directed Dock to conduct an inspection of the area. During the initial inspection, Dock did not alert to any of the four odors he is trained to detect. Dock was placed back in his kennel. 70. Detective Romo and DEA Special Agent Garza then placed the currency in the search area inside an empty ?le cabinet drawer that Dock had previously inspected. A short time later, Detective Gabrick removed Dock from his kennel and directed Dock to conduct an inspection of the area in which the currency had been placed. 71. When Dock began to sniff. the drawer that contained currency in the amount of $36,000, Dock?s breathing increased, his behavior changed, and at 1646 hours, Dock began to scratch the drawer with one front paw. Detective Gabrick recognized this as a positive alert, indicating Dock smelled at least one of the four odors he is trained to detect. Dock alerted to the $36,000, which had been placed in the ?le cabinet drawer. 72. Investigators advised YOUNG that the $36,000 currency found was being seized as part of a money laundering investigation. 73. -YOUNG was given a receipt for the currency. 74. Investigators conducted a ?nancial records check on YOUNG and the business he owned, Motors, which revealed no records of ?nancial activity and no business bank account. 75. The ?nancial records check revealed several bank records from Bank of America regarding accounts belonging to YOUNG in Niagara Falls and Buffalo, New York. I 76. The records indicated a non-customer was making deposits into an out-of- state account. .Case Document 1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 9 of 11 77. The unknown customer only had the account number, name and a large cash deposit. 78. Another report indicated that an unknown customer was depositing large cash sums into an account belonging to YOUNG in different Bank of America banks in New York. 79. The report indicated as soon as the cash was deposited they were withdrawn at different Bank of America Centers in Arizona. 80. Additional account activity revealed YOUNG received large cash deposits at other Bank of America branches in New York. 81. American Airlines records showed that YOUNG made six cross country ?ights from April 2014 to April 2015. 82. Ticketing information showed the tickets were purchased with credit card. I 83. Ticketing information showed the ?ight tickets were purchased the day of or the day before the scheduled ?ight. Seizure of Currency 84. The currency was seized by Drug Enforcement Administration on April 23, 2015. 85. On or about July 10, 2015, DEA received a claim dated July 8,2015, from Zane YOUNG, through counsel Thomas M. Baker, claiming 100% legal and/or equitable interest in the $3 6,000 in US. currency. Zane Young?s Criminal History 86. On or about May 1, 2009, YOUNG was arrested by the Buckeye Police Department in Buckeye, Arizona, for Marijuana Possession. The charge was dismissed on November 20, 2009. 87. On or about September 11, 2014, YOUNG was arrested by the Tucson Metro Counter Narcotics for marijuana violation. \ochmuw Case Document 1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 10 of 11 88. On or about May 1, 2009, YOUNG was arrested by Immigration Customs and Border Protection YOUNG was deported by ICE in Yuma, Arizona, to Jamaica. DES Employment Search 89. During the course of the investigation, investigators ran a query of employment history in the Department of Economic Security?s database for Arizona. The database showed no employment, wages, or unemployment bene?ts for YOUNG. I Demand/Source Relationship 90. A demand/source relationship exists between Orlando, Florida and southwest states relating to the distribution of illegal drugs. Drug money couriers commonly travel from the southeast such as Orlando, Florida, to Phoenix and other southwest states for the purpose of transporting currency intended to be used to purchase illicit drugs. Due to its close proximity to the U.S./Mexico border, Phoenix is a supply location regarding the distribution of illegal drugs throughout the United States. Seizure of Currency 91. Investigators seized $3 6,000.00 from YOUNG. 92. The following represents a breakdown of the $36,000.00 currency found in YOUNG's carry-on bag: Number of Bills Denomination Am?t 178 100.00 17,800.00 128 50.00 6,400.00 577 20.00 11,540.00 23 10.00 230.00 6 5.00 30.00 0 1.00 -0.00- Total: 36,000.00 10 .52Case Document 1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 11 of 11 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1 through 92 above. Based on the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the above described defendant, in the approximate amount of $36,000.00, is property within the jurisdiction of the United States which is subject to forfeiture pursuant to the provisions of 21 U.S.C. 881(a)(6) because it was furnished or intended to be ?lmished by a person in exchange for a controlled substance or listed chemical in Violation of Title II of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq, or is proceeds traceable to such an exchange, or was used or intended to be used to facilitate a Violation of Title 11 of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq. WHEREFORE, the United States of America prays that process of warrant in rem issue for the arrest of the Defendant currency; that due notice be given to all parties to appear and show cause Why the forfeiture should not be decreed; that judgment be entered declaring the Defendant currency be forfeited to the United States of America for disposition according to law; and that the United States of America be granted such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper, together with the costs and disbursements of this action. A DATED this 9 b" day of October, 2015. JOHN S. LEONARDO United States Attorney s. Assistant United States Attorney 11 Case Document 1-1 Filed 10/06/15 Page 1 of 1 VERIFICATION 1, Special Agent Roderick A. Garza, hereby verify and declare under penalty of perjury that I, Roderick A. Garza, am a Special Agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration, that I have read the foregoing Veri?ed Complaint In Rem and know the contents thereof, and that the matters contained in the Veri?ed Complaint are true to my own knoWledge, except that those matters herein stated to be alleged on information and belief and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. The sources of our knowledge and information and the grounds of my belief are the of?cial files and records of the United States, information supplied to me by other law enforcement officers, as well as my investigation of this case, together with others, as a Special Agent with the Drug EnforcementAdministration. I hereby verify and declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on this gfkday of October, 2015. 271 Roderick A. Garza, Special Agent Drug Enforcement Administration Case Document 1-2 Filed 10/06/15 Page 1 of 2 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Civil Cover Sheet This automated JS-44 conforms generally to the manual 38-44 approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974. The data is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the pulpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. The information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filing and service of pieadings or other papers as required by law. This form is authorized for use only in the District of Arizona. The completed cover sheet must be printed directly to PDF and filed as an attachment to the Complaint or Notice of Removal. United States Attorneys Of?ce Defendant $36,000.00 1n United States (3). Currency County of Residence: Maricopa County of Residence: Maricopa County Where Claim For Relief Arose: Maricopa Plaintiffs Atty(s): Defendant's Atty(s): Jeffrey Borup United States Attorney's Of?ce 40 North Central, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 602-514-7500 Ii. Basis of Jurisdiction: 1. US. Government Plaintiff Citizenship of Principal Parties (Diversity Cases Only) Plaintiff: - Defendant: IV. Origin 1. Original Proceeding V. Nature of Suit: 625 Drug Related Seizure of Property 21 USC 881 VI.Cause of Action: Forfeiture of property to the United States pursuant to 21 U.S.C. ?881(a)(6)for violations of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. ?801, et. seq. VII. Requested in Complaint Class Action: No Dollar Demand: 36,000.00 Jury Demand: No This case is not related to another case. s44.pl 0/ 6/ 20 1 5 Case Document 1-2 Filed 10/06/15 I Page 2 of 2 Page 2 of 2 Signature: s/ Jeffrey R. Borup Date: 10/06/2015 if any of this information is incorrect, please go back to the Civil Cover Sheet Input form using the Back button in your browser and change it. Once correct, save this form as a PDF and include it as an attachment to your case opening documents. Reviseii: gov/cgi-bin/generatemcivilj s44.