United States v. Michael D. Mullet

990 F.2d 1264 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Michael D. MULLET, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-10337. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 15, 1993. Decided April 8, 1993. 1 Before SCHROEDER and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges, and KING, * District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Mullet was indicted by an Arizona State Grand Jury for one count of illegally conducting an enterprise and seven counts of fraudulent scheme and artifice in violation of Ariz.Rev.Stat. §§ 13-2312 & 13-2310. Several months later, the Arizona Corporation Commission ordered Mullet to pay restitution and an administrative penalty based on the same illegal conduct. 4 Mullet argued that criminal prosecution in state court would violate double jeopardy because the Commission's order was a "punishment." The state trial court rejected this argument and Mullet appealed. The Arizona Court of Appeals remanded…