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. Boyer

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts

November 10, 2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Government,
v.
EDWARD BOYER et al., Defendants

For Edward Boyer, Defendant: Kevin J. Reddington, LEAD ATTORNEY, Law Offices of Kevin J. Reddington, Brockton, MA.

For Patrick Murphy, Defendant: Jane F. Peachy, LEAD ATTORNEY, Federal Public Defender Office, Boston, MA.

For Paul Pedreira, Defendant: James H. Budreau, LEAD ATTORNEY, Bassil, Klovee & Budreau, Boston, MA.

For Nathan Arruda, Defendant: Mark D Smith, LEAD ATTORNEY, Laredo & Smith, LLP, Boston, MA.

For David Simmons, Defendant: Edward L. Hayden, LEAD ATTORNEY, Lynn, MA.

For Travis Nichols, Defendant: David M. Jellinek, Law Office of David Jellinek, Newton, MA; Liam D. Scully, Boston, MA.

For Jayme Reynolds, Defendant: Paul J. Garrity, LEAD ATTORNEY, Londonderry, NH.

For USA, Plaintiff: Theodore B. Heinrich, LEAD ATTORNEY, United States Attorney's Office, Boston, MA; Veronica M. Lei, United States Attorney's Office MA, Boston, MA.

Page 174

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

Nathaniel M. Gorton, United States District Judge.

In June, 2014, defendant Edward Boyer (" Boyer" ) was charged with conspiring to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. The one-count Indictment includes a forfeiture allegation pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853 which states that, if convicted, Boyer and his co-defendants shall forfeit any property obtained as a result of the charged offense or used to commit that offense. The allegation also notifies defendants that the government will seek the forfeiture of substitute assets up to the value of the unavailable property pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(p). It specifically identifies as a substitute asset

the real property located at 159 Bay State Road, Rehoboth, Massachusetts, including all buildings and appurtenances thereon, more particularly described in a deed recorded at Book 18756, Page 111 at the Northern Bristol County Registry of Deeds.

Boyer owns the subject property (" the Rehoboth Property" ) in joint tenancy with his girlfriend.

The government seeks to record a lis pendens against the Rehoboth Property to facilitate its forfeiture as a substitute asset, if necessary, upon Boyer's conviction. A lis pendens is a notice recorded in a real property's chain of title that warns all persons that such property is the subject matter of litigation and that " any interests acquired during the pendency of the suit are subject to its outcome." Speleos v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P., 755 F.Supp.2d 304, 312 (D. Mass. 2010).

The government contends that its forfeiture allegation constitutes a claim of right to title or for ...


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.