United States v. Edwin Elgersma

Good Law
92 Daily Journal DAR 15145·979 F.2d 750·1992 WL 321272·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 29441·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9148
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 10, 199291-30471California2,343 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alarcon, J.

Edwin C. Elgersma appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss a second superceding indictment in the District Court for the District of Montana (Montana indictment) charging him with racketeering conspiracy, racketeering, money laundering, illicit monetary transactions, illicit interstate travel, bank fraud, investment of drug profits, conspiracy to invest drug profits, bribery, and structuring illegal financial transactions. Elgers-ma argues that the Montana prosecution is barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment because (1) the Montana indictment charges him with the same conduct for which he was convicted in the District Court for the Middle. District of Florida (Florida indictment); (2) the Montana and Florida indictments divide a single conspiracy into multiple prosecutions; and (3) the doctrine of collateral estoppel prohibits subsequent litigation of issues that have been finally determined. We affirm because we conclude that Elgersma has not been placed in double jeopardy, and the doctrine of collateral estoppel is not applicable under these facts. We also hold that a single conspiracy was not divided into multiple prosecutions.

.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.