United States v. Robert I. Bendis, Andrew D'amato, Armand Mucci

These are interlocutory appeals from the orders of the district court denying appellants’ motions to dismiss an indictment returned against them in the District of Hawaii. Appellants contend that the Hawaii indictment is barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment, is the product of vindictive prosecution and should be dismissed due to delay and allegedly improper introduction of evidence before the grand jury. We have jurisdiction only as to the double jeopardy and vindictive prosecution claims. See Abney v. United States, 431 U.S. 651 , 97 S.Ct. 2034 , 52 L.Ed.2d 651 (1977) (double jeopardy); United States v. Griffin, 617 F.2d 1342 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 863 , 101 S.Ct. 167 , 66 L.Ed.2d 80 (1980), (vindictive prosecution). We affirm the district court orders refusing to dismiss the indictment on these bases and dismiss the appeal in all other respects for want of jurisdiction.

I

On January 14, 1980, a five-count indictment was returned in the District of Hawaii charging appellants and Mark Iuteri as follows: Count One charges a conspiracy between March 2 and May 2, 1977 to cause interstate travel and use of wire communication in furtherance of a…