Com. v. Wingait Farms, C-D

Decision Date29 June 1995
Docket NumberC-D
CourtPennsylvania Commonwealth Court
PartiesCOMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. WINGAIT FARMS. Appeal of George REITZ, Appellant. (Three Cases.) COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. ONE HORSE KNOWN AS "OLYMPIAKOS", One Horse Known as "Marmalade's Feast", One Horse Known as "Mijita Rica", One Horse Known as "Mijita Rica's Foal", One Horse Known as "Call Me Goin", One Horse Known as "Double Leader", One Horse Known as "Yearling Colt Out of Majestic Royal", One Horse Known as "Yearling Colt Out of Crafty & Hasty", One Horse Known as "Blaze Leader", One Horse Known as "Liebenbeck", One Horse Known as "Baquette", One Horse Known as "Yearling Colt Out of Princess Kameha", One Horse Known as "Yearling Colt Out ofiana", One Horse Known as "Independent Leader", One Horse Known as "Damascus House", One Horse Known as "Damascus House Foal", One Horse Known as "Grape Jam", One Horse Known as "Grape Jam's Foal". COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. HORSES: PRINCESS KAMEHA TRACK BARRIN. COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. WINGAIT FARMS. Appeal of Linda REITZ, Appellant.

Albert J. Cepparulo, for appellant George Reitz.

Marc I. Rickles, for appellant Linda Reitz.

Stephen B. Harris, Chief of Appeals, for appellee.

Before McGINLEY and NEWMAN, JJ., and DELLA PORTA, Senior Judge.

NEWMAN, Judge.

George Reitz (Reitz) appeals an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County (trial court) forfeiting Wingait Farms (a horse farm), twenty-seven horses and various articles of personal property. The trial court entered the order pursuant to a jury verdict that found Reitz used this property to facilitate violations of The Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act (Drug Act) 1. Reitz's wife, Linda, appeals from the trial

                court's entry of a directed verdict against her, based on its determination that she did not have an ownership interest in Wingait Farms. 2  We affirm
                
PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In Spring 1992, the Bucks County District Attorney's Office and local law enforcement officials conducted an undercover investigation of Reitz's narcotics trafficking activities. One of Reitz's associates, Edward Stanton, cooperated in the investigation by wearing an electronic recording device that he used to record conversations with Reitz regarding drug transactions. On May 7, 1992, Reitz was arrested for delivering twenty-nine pounds of marijuana to Stanton. Reitz pled guilty to a variety of criminal charges relating to the sale and distribution of marijuana, including corrupt organizations, possession with intent to deliver, dealing in unlawful proceeds and conspiracy. On March 22, 1993, the trial court sentenced him to a term of seven and one-half to twenty years in the state penitentiary, and ordered him to pay fines and restitution totalling $140,000.

On May 8, 1992, the day after Reitz's arrest, the trial court issued an order enjoining Reitz from transferring or conveying Wingait Farms. Shortly thereafter, the Commonwealth, pursuant to the Controlled Substance Forfeiture Act (Forfeiture Act), 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6801-6802, filed petitions seeking forfeiture of real and personal property including Wingait Farms, horses, farming equipment, household items, and motor vehicles. On October 12, 1993, a jury trial commenced on the forfeiture petitions. The jury reached a verdict on October 20, 1993, based on which the trial court ordered the forfeiture of Wingait Farms, various items of personal property and Reitz's interest in twenty-seven horses. The instant appeals followed.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Wingait Farms

Wingait Farms is comprised of two sixty-five acre parcels in Springfield Township, Bucks County. Reitz purchased Wingait Farms in August 1983 for $300,000.00. He and Linda were married on October 3, 1987. The day before the wedding they executed an antenuptial agreement which provided, inter alia, that Wingait Farms was Reitz's sole and separate property, and that Linda would have no claim against Wingait Farms or any other property owned by Reitz.

The Reitzes moved to Wingait Farms in late 1988 or early 1989. They used the farm for horse breeding, a hay business and growing Christmas trees. Linda was actively involved in the renovation of the property and the operation of the farm.

Prior to the arrest of Reitz in May 1992, he and his wife never took any action to rescind the antenuptial agreement. However, on October 7, 1993, five days before the forfeiture trial began, the Reitzes entered into a written stipulation stating that the antenuptial agreement was null and void.

Forfeiture Trial

Haig Palouian (Palouian), a high school classmate of Reitz who began distributing marijuana for him in 1988, testified at the forfeiture trial. He testified that in November 1990, he visited Wingait Farms where he saw approximately thirty to forty pounds of marijuana spread out on a pool cover in a third floor bedroom. Palouian helped Reitz package and weigh the marijuana.

Palouian also testified that in 1991, Reitz placed a fifty-five gallon plastic barrel in Palouian's basement for the purpose of storing marijuana. On three occasions in 1991, Reitz had shipments of thirty to forty pounds of marijuana delivered to Palouian's house. Each time they packaged and weighed the marijuana together before Reitz removed it from the premises.

Reitz admitted that he placed the barrels in Palouian's basement for storing marijuana, and also admitted that he had two similar barrels on his property. When police searched Wingait Farms, they found the two barrels buried behind the horse barn.

Thomas Haley (Haley), one of Reitz's marijuana suppliers, also testified at the forfeiture trial. They first met in New Mexico in 1985, at which time Reitz expressed an interest in obtaining marijuana. In 1988, Haley telephoned Reitz at Wingait Farms offering to sell him fifty-five pounds of marijuana. Reitz made the purchase through an intermediary for $40,000.00.

In December 1991, Haley again called Reitz at the horse farm and offered to sell him marijuana at $1,150 per pound. Haley drove forty to forty-five pounds of marijuana to Bucks County where he delivered it to the home of Reitz's sister and brother-in-law Anna and David Ganteaume. In January 1992, Haley delivered another forty pounds of marijuana to the Ganteaume residence.

Haley testified that in March 1992 he met with Reitz at a hotel in Philadelphia. Reitz showed him an appraisal of his horses to impress him with their value.

On or about May 1992, Haley transported 101 pounds of marijuana to King of Prussia where he transferred it to a van pursuant to arrangements made by Reitz. At the time of delivery, Reitz paid Haley $23,000. The agreed upon price for this sale was $1,125 per pound.

Haley testified that he received approximately $110,000.00 to $115,000.00 from Reitz for the sale of marijuana. When Reitz was arrested in May, 1992, he still owed Haley $90,000.00.

Edward Stanton (Stanton) testified that in 1986 or 1987 Reitz began supplying him with marijuana that he sold to other individuals. Stanton was arrested in March 1992 and agreed to cooperate with authorities in their investigation of Reitz. At that time he owed Reitz $39,000.00.

At the forfeiture trial, Stanton testified concerning a number of drug transactions. On March 16, 1992, Stanton met Reitz at a restaurant in Bensalem Township, Bucks County, where he paid him $3,000.00 toward his $39,000.00 debt. Detective Baronowski of Middletown Township testified that he followed Reitz from the restaurant to Wingait Farms.

Stanton met Reitz at Wingait Farms on March 23, 1992 and paid him another $3,000.00. At that meeting, Reitz produced a document referred to as an "owe" sheet, which indicated the amounts that Stanton and others owed him for marijuana that he delivered to them. The "owe" sheet was kept in the office at the farm.

On March 27, 1992, Stanton telephoned Reitz at Wingait Farms regarding a delivery of marijuana. Reitz instructed Stanton to go to a diner in Bucks County where his sister would meet him. Reitz's sister arrived at the arranged location in Reitz's vehicle and delivered two pounds of marijuana to Stanton.

Stanton met Reitz at Wingait Farms on March 30, 1992 and delivered $11,000.00 to him in partial payment for the marijuana he had received.

On April 6, 1992, Stanton met Reitz at Chi-Chi's Restaurant in Middletown Township and paid him $3,000.00. They met at the same restaurant on April 15, 1992, at which time Stanton paid him $12,000.00. Reitz placed the money in his vehicle and drove to Wingait Farms. The two met again a week later at a restaurant in Doylestown, where Stanton made a payment of $8,000.00 to Reitz.

Stanton and Reitz next met on May 4, 1992 at Chi-Chi's Restaurant. During the meeting, which was recorded by Stanton, Reitz stated that he needed to collect drug payments owed to him in order to make his payroll at Wingait Farms. This taped conversation was played to the jury at the forfeiture trial. However, Reitz testified that he was lying when he made that statement to Stanton.

On May 7, 1992, Reitz delivered twenty-nine pounds of marijuana to Stanton in a cardboard box with the name "Saxon" printed on it. Following the delivery, Reitz was arrested.

Detective Baronowski testified that a subsequent search of the attic at Wingait Farms yielded numerous "Saxon" boxes identical to the one Reitz used to deliver marijuana to Stanton. Among other items found during the search were two fifty-five gallon barrels similar to the one in Palouian's basement two scales, two suitcases containing marijuana residue, and "owe" sheets that were hidden behind the molding of the door to Reitz's office. Detective Baronowski testified that the "owe" sheets indicated Reitz had delivered marijuana worth $483,760.00.

Appeal of George Reitz

On appeal, Reitz contends that the trial court erred when it 1) refused requests for a jury...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Commonwealth v. 1997 Chevrolet
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court
    • December 17, 2014
    ...36 F.3d at 364 ; Milbrand, 58 F.3d at 847. In von Hofe, 492 F.3d 175, the house was used to grow marijuana. In Commonwealth v. Wingait Farms, 659 A.2d 584, 594–95 (Pa.Cmwlth.1995), affirmed, 547 Pa. 332, 690 A.2d 222 (1997), a horse farm was forfeited because it served as the base of a larg......
  • Com. v. Higginbottom
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Superior Court
    • June 12, 1996
    ...the means to commit additional offenses and [ ] help[ing] the state defray the costs of investigation and prosecution." Commonwealth v. Wingait Farms, 659 A.2d 584, 591 (Pa.Cmwlth.1995), alloc. granted, 542 Pa. 676, 668 A.2d 1137 (1995). Therefore, because the forfeiture of the $252.00 that......
  • People v. Felix
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • July 26, 1996
    ...164 Misc.2d 204, 623 N.Y.S.2d 999 (N.Y.Sup.Ct.1995). State v. 1989 Ford F-150 Pickup, 888 P.2d 1036 (Okla.Ct.App.1994). Commonwealth v. Wingait Farms, 659 A.2d 584 (Pa.Cmwlth.1995). State v. One Lot of $8,560 U.S. Currency, 670 A.2d 772 (R.I.1996). Fant v. State, 881 S.W.2d 830, 834 (Tex.Ct......
  • Com. of Pa. v. Vasquez
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court
    • April 4, 2018
    ...had the requisite interest in the Vehicle and the Cash to contest the Commonwealth's Forfeiture Petition. See, e.g. , Commonwealth v. Wingait Farms , 659 A.2d 584 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1995) (affirming dismissal of wife's challenge to forfeiture of husband's property for lack of standing), aff'd , 5......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT