United States v. Elbert Johnson, United States of America v. Jose Leonardo Contreras-Subias

967 F.2d 594 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Elbert JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Leonardo CONTRERAS-SUBIAS, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 91-50032, 91-50033. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submission Deferred Feb. 5, 1992. Resubmitted April 2, 1992. Decided June 3, 1992. Before WALLACE, Chief Judge, and JAMES R. BROWNING and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges. MEMORANDUM 1 Johnson and Contreras-Subias (Contreras) appeal from the order of the district court denying their motion to dismiss the indictment on the basis that it violates double jeopardy. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231 . We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review a denial of a motion to dismiss the indictment for a violation of double jeopardy de novo. United States v. Bates, 917 F.2d 388, 398 (9th…