HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-MD-0401-2004
COMMONWEAL TH
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
$141,370.00 U.S. CURRENCY
CP-21-MD-401-2004
COMMONWEALTH OF
PENNSYLVANIA EX REL.
HERMAN KEESE OWNER OF
$141,370 RE: POLICE INCIDENT
NO. T5-5014214
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE
CP-21-MD-401-2004
IN RE: PETITION OF THE COMMONWEALTH FOR FORFEITURE OF $141.370 AND
PETITION OF HERMAN KEESE. JR. FOR RETURN OF $141.370
OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
Bayley, J., December 1, 2004:--
On May 22,2004, at approximately 5:56 p.m., Corporal Brian Merritt of the
Pennsylvania State Police stopped a Ford Excursion on the Pennsylvania Turnpike in
North Middletown Township, Cumberland County. The vehicle, which was westbound,
was clocked by radar at 86 miles per hour in a 65 mile per hour zone. The driver was
Lawrence Fair. He did not have a driver's license. A right front passenger was Brett
Townsend. Shannon Bridges and Herman Keese, Jr. were passengers in the rear.
Brett Townsend provided Trooper Merritt with a copy of a Budget rental agreement for
the vehicle in the name of Angela Williams, who was not present. Townsend said he
CP-21-MD-401-2004
was authorized by Williams to use the vehicle. He had a driver's license. Trooper
Merritt conducted an NCIC check that showed that Lawrence Fair was wanted in South
Carolina. Fair was placed under arrest. He told the trooper that he and the others
were going to California to help Townsend move some furniture. While at the scene,
Trooper Merritt received a communication that South Carolina would not extradite Fair.
The trooper uncuffed him and issued citations for speeding and driving without a valid
driver's license.
Ultimately, after a drug dog alerted at the passenger door of the Ford Excursion,
Brett Townsend gave consent to allow the dog inside the vehicle. The dog then alerted
in the luggage area. A search warrant was obtained. The vehicle was searched, and
in the luggage area a large amount of cash was found in a shoebox that was inside a
tote bag. Harold Keese, Jr. told Corporal Merritt that it was his money and that there
was $131,000 or $132,000, for which he had receipts. He said he had taken a
mortgage out for the money, and that he had it because he was going to buy some
cars. The cash was seized. There was $141,370 was in the shoebox. It was
packaged with rubber bands in ten thousand dollar and five thousand dollar
increments, and within those stacks were one thousand dollar stacks. The stacks
contained hundreds, fifties, twenties, tens and fives. There were numbers, such as ten
thousand dollars and five thousand dollars, on most of the stacks. None of the stacks
contained bank wrappers.
No criminal charges were filed against any of the occupants of the Ford
-2-
CP-21-MD-401-2004
Excursion. On July 21,2004, Herman Keese, Jr., filed a petition for the return of the
money. On August 23,2004, the Commonwealth filed a petition for forfeiture, alleging
that the $141,370 is traceable to illegal drug activity. The petitions were heard together
at hearings on September 20 and October 7, 2004. Post-hearing briefs have been
filed.
In Pennsylvania, the Commonwealth may forfeit money "[f]urnished or intended
to be furnished by any person in exchange for a controlled substance in violation of
The Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act, and all proceeds traceable
to such an exchange." 42 Pa.C.S. S 6801 (a)(6)(i)(A). The Commonwealth Court in
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. $11,600.00 Cash, US Currency, 858 A.2d 160
(Pa. Commw. 2004), stated:
In a forfeiture case, the Commonwealth bears the burden of establishing
by a preponderance of the evidence that a nexus exists between the
pertinent unlawful activity and the property subject to forfeiture.
Commonwealth v. All That Certain Parcel and Lot of Land Located at
4029 Beale Avenue, Altoona, Blair County, Pennsylvania, 545 Pa. 172,
680 A.2d 1128 (1996). Preponderance of the evidence is tantamount to a
"more likely than not: standard. Commonwealth v. $32,950 U.S.
Currency, 160 Pa. Commwlth. 58, 634 A.2d 697, 698 n. 9 (1993), appeal
denied sub nom., Commonwealth v. Friel, 538 Pa. 637, 647 A.2d 512
(1994). Once the Commonwealth has sustained its burden, the burden of
proof shifts to the property owner to prove (1) that he is the owner of the
money; (2) that he lawfully acquired the money; and (3) that the money
was not unlawfully used or possessed by him. $16,208.38 U.S. Currency,
635 A.2d at 238.
To establish the nexus between the $141,370 and illegal drug activity, the
Commonwealth introduced expert testimony that the packaging of the $141,370 was
-3-
CP-21-MD-401-2004
consistent with the way street level drug dealers package money and bring it to
suppliers. The Commonwealth conducted an ion scan on the $141,370. The scan
showed 1,199 digital units of cocaine high, 958 digital units of cocaine, and 539 digital
units of Procaine, a cutting agent used to increase the amount of cocaine available for
sale. The casual contact level for money found in circulation in banks in Pennsylvania
is 204.4 digital units. On October 4, 2004, the casual contact level for money in banks
in Pendleton and Greenville, South Carolina, was 196 digital units. Thus, the ion scan
showed six times more cocaine on the subject money than one would expect to find
generally on money in Pennsylvania and South Carolina banks. Procaine is rarely
found on money in general circulation.
At the hearing, Herman Keese, Jr., testified that the money that was seized
came from three sources. First, he said that in the summer of 2003, his father
mortgaged a house in Pendleton, South Carolina, that netted $49,000. The proceeds
were in cashiers' checks, which his father cashed at a Bank of America. His father
gave him the $49,000 in fifties and hundreds which were in bank wrappers. Keese took
that money to his ex-wife's house in Philadelphia and hid it in his daughter's room.
Second, Keese testified that Derrick Walker, a friend of his father, loaned his father "in
the neighborhood of $65,000 to $70,000." His father gave him that money, which was
in tens, twenties and fifties, at the same time he gave him the money from the mortgage
of the property in Pendleton, South Carolina. Keese placed the Walker money in his
third wife's house in Philadelphia. Third, Keese testified that he received "close to
-4-
CP-21-MD-401-2004
$30,000 more" from his ex-wife Debra Barns. This money consisted of $8,500 or
$8,600 cash and another $19,000 that Barns wire transferred him to San Francisco, for
a total of $27,500 or $27,600.1 He had brought that money to Philadelphia. He
testified that he later mixed his three sources of money into packets of tens, twenties,
fifties and hundreds and wrapped them with rubber bands.
Keese testified that none of the money he received from any of his sources was
put into a bank because he did not have an account. All of the money was seized
when he was on his way to San Francisco to invest it in a car business:
I had been out to San Francisco when I met Debra, and I saw that
the property value and stuff out there was real high. So everybody out
there was making money. So I felt that if the towing business would go
there everybody could afford to pay you, and if I sold cars there you could
get paid. Everybody had insurance. And it was better than Philly
because most of the time here the money - the neighborhoods is poor,
you know, so I saw it was more opportunity out there.
Keese testified that prior to leaving for San Francisco he worked for his father's
towing service in Philadelphia and sold cars. Sometimes he made $3,500 a week.
Sometimes it was $1,500 - "I know it was a nice little bit of money." He used his
earnings to support himself and his six children. He testified that he did not file income
tax returns in 2002 or 2003.
The claimant's father, Herman Keese, Sr., also testified that he operates a tow
truck business. His son worked for him and earned "a couple a hundred a week. See,
we was putting the money away, trying to get straightened out together to get another
1 Barns did not testify.
-5-
CP-21-MD-401-2004
truck." He testified that in 2004, he gave his son "a hundred some thousand because it
was ninety something I borrowed on the house" he rents in Pendleton, South Carolina.
He then testified that when the mortgage was taken he obtained "$60,000 to $70,000 or
something like that." He said he cashed the proceeds in a bank in Greenville, South
Carolina, and obtained cash. He then gave his son another $60,000 cash a few
months prior to the first hearing on September 20, 2004. That money came from a co-
account that he owned with his granddaughter who is the daughter of Herman Keese,
Jr. When questioned by counsel for the claimant, Keese changed his testimony. He
was shown copies of records from a mortgage transaction for a property in Pendleton,
South Carolina, with the New Century Mortgage Corp. on July 29,2003, with
disbursement of $49,411.25 to the borrower, Herman Keese, Sr., on August 4, 2003.
He said that he gave his son the proceeds of $49,411 rather than the $60,000 to
$70,000 that he testified to earlier. Counsel then showed him a check dated April 23,
2002, in the amount of $117,572.55 issued by State Farm Fire and Casualty Company
to Derrick Walker & National City Mortgage Co., its Succ and/or Assigns. No
endorsement was attached. He also showed him a check dated August 7,2002, in the
amount of $29,414.79 issued by National City Mortgage to Derrick Walker Carpenter
Finisher. There was an endorsement on that check to "pay to the order of Main Street
Bank, Covington, Georgia. . . for deposit only Carpenter Finisher." For the first time
Keese mentioned Derrick Walker who he said was a friend who lives in Georgia.
Counsel asked Keese, "And that was money you had received or borrowed or gotten
-6-
CP-21-MD-401-2004
from a Mr. Derrick Walker, is that correct?" Keese answered, "Right."2
The facts of this case are strikingly similar to those in Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania v. $11,600.00 Cash, US Currency, supra. In that case the claimant,
Cristian Maracine, was stopped for a traffic violation on November 13, 2001. He was
arrested on outstanding warrants for traffic tickets. The police searched him and found
money in his pockets. He said it was $8,000.00 or $9,000.00. It was actually $11,600.
An officer asked Maracine where he got all the money, and Maracine stated that "he
worked for Paolo's Pizza" and that he "was just coming from there." The officer asked
Maracine how much he made, and Maracine stated that the made "$450 a week."
Maracine told the officer that he was going to buy a car that day, but "did not get a
chance to buy it." Maracine stated that he had a checking account and a savings
account but he "felt like paying cash" for the car. The police seized the money. No
illegal drugs were found on his person or in his vehicle. No criminal charges were filed.
The Commonwealth subsequently discovered that Maracine made $3,000 from Paolo's
Pizza for all of 2001.
The Commonwealth performed an ion scan on the money to test for the
presence of illegal narcotic particles. The money contained 1,028 digital units of
cocaine and 1,302 digital units of cocaine high. The casual contact level on money in
Pennsylvania banks that year was 234 digital units of cocaine. Thus, the scan showed
that the money contained five times the amount of cocaine than one would expect for
2 Derrick Walker did not testify.
-7-
CP-21-MD-401-2004
currency in general circulation in Pennsylvania. The trial court found that the
-8-
CP-21-MD-401-2004
Commonwealth had met its burden of proof under the Forfeiture Act, and that
Maracine's explanation for the source of the money did not rebut the presumption that it
came from cocaine transactions. In affirming the forfeiture, the Commonwealth Court
concluded that the evidence from the ion scan negated the money having only been in
casual contact with cocaine. The Court stated:
It is axiomatic, that the Commonwealth need not produce evidence
directly linking seized property to illegal activity in order to establish, by a
preponderance of the evidence, the requisite nexus between seized
property and unlawful activity. Commonwealth v. McJett, 811 A.2d at
110. The Commonwealth's evidence sufficiently proved that the money,
which had five times the amount of cocaine than that found on money in
the general circulation, was "furnished... in exchange for a controlled
substance..., [or represented the] proceeds traceable to such an
exchange."
The Court distinguished the facts in Commonwealth v. Marshall, 548 Pa. 495,
698 A.2d 576 (1997), in which the Supreme Court of Pennsylvanian refused to rely on a
positive indication by a drug dog on cash because a dog alert alone only shows a
suspicion and not a nexus between money and drug activity. In contrast, the scientific
evidence from an ion scan showed cocaine on the money in significantly quantifiable
terms well above money generally found in banks.
In the case sub judice, the ion scan showed that the money seized contained
six times the amount of cocaine that one would expect to find in general circulation. In
addition, Procaine which is rarely found on money in general circulation, was detected.
The packaging of the money suggests that it was linked to illegal activity. As in
Commonwealth v. $11,600 Cash, supra, the Commonwealth has established the
-9-
CP-21-MD-401-2004
requisite nexus between the $141,370 seized and unlawful drug activity. The claimant
has not proven that he lawfully acquired the money and that it was not unlawfully
possessed by him. His testimony and that of his father strains credulity:
(1) The claimant testified that his father mortgaged a house in Pendleton, South
Carolina, in the summer of 2003, cashed checks for the net proceeds, and gave him the
$49,411. He then retained the cash until it was seized on May 22, 2004. That the
claimant would not have opened an income producing account using the cashiers'
checks is inexplicable. On the other hand, we can understand his reluctance, not
having a bank account, to take large amounts of cash to a bank unless he could find
one that was into money laundering.
(2) The claimant testified that he chose to go to San Francisco with $141,370 in
cash because there was more opportunity there than in Philadelphia, notwithstanding
that he was earning $1,500 to $3,500 a week and not paying taxes. His father, on the
other hand, testified that his son only made "a couple hundred a week" from his towing
business.
(3) There was about $10,000 more in the shoebox than the claimant told
Corporal Merritt that it contained. That is a lot of money to forget, especially when most
of the stacks were marked with numbers.
(4) The claimant told Corporal Merritt that he had receipts for the money. He
has no receipts.
(5) The claimant's father testified that in 2004 he gave his son "a hundred some
-10-
CP-21-MD-401-2004
thousand dollars because it was ninety something I borrowed on the house." He
received $60,000 to $70,000 from the mortgage. He then gave his son another
$60,000 cash a few months before September 20,2004, which came from a co-account
with his granddaughter who is the daughter of Herman Keese, Jr. He then was shown
copies of two checks totaling $146,987.34 made payable to Derrick Walker, of Georgia,
in April 23,2002, which he was led to say he received or borrowed from Walker. How
or why any of this money got to his son he never explained, nor did he then clarified his
testimony regarding the money he said came from a co-account with his
granddaughter. You would think that we would have heard from Walker.
(6) If Debra Barns, an ex-wife, actually loaned the claimant about $27,500 in
cash to start a new business, you would think that there would be receipts or that we
would have heard from Barns.
This court can accept all of, part of or none of a witness's testimony. The
testimony of Herman Keese, Jr., and his father Herman Keese as to where the seized
$141,370 came from, is completely unbelievable. We conclude that the money was
furnished in exchange for cocaine, is traceable to such exchanges, and therefore
subject to forfeiture pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. Section 6801 (a)(6)(i)(A). For the foregoing
reasons, the following order is entered.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this day of December, 2004, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) The petition of Herman Keese, Jr., for the return of $141 ,370 seized by the
-11-
CP-21-MD-401-2004
Pennsylvania State Police on May 22, 2004, IS DENIED.
(2) The petition of the Commonwealth for forfeiture of $141 ,370 seized by the
Pennsylvania State Police on May 22,2004, IS GRANTED. The $141,370 IS
FORFEITED TO THE COMMONWEALTH.
By the Court,
Edgar B. Bayley, J.
Kishan Nair, Esquire
Senior Deputy Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
2305 28th Street South West
Allentown, PA 18103
For the Commonwealth
Marc Frumer, Esquire
4961 Oxford Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19124
For Claimant
:sal
-12-