United States v. Jose Rolan-Tapia, Albert S. Hernandez, Jose Luis Valenzuela Garcia, and Susana Lamont Valenzuela

9 F.3d 1555 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Jose ROLAN-TAPIA, Albert S. Hernandez, Jose Luis Valenzuela Garcia, and Susana Lamont Valenzuela, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 93-10151, 93-10153, 93-10194 and 93-10195. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Sept. 2, 1993. Decided Oct. 14, 1993. Before: D.W. NELSON and NORRIS, Circuit Judges, and TANNER, ** Senior District Judge. MEMORANDUM *** Defendants in this consolidated, interlocutory appeal challenge an order by the district court denying their motion to dismiss the indictment for violations of the Double Jeopardy Clause. U.S. Const. amend. V. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review the denial by the district court of a motion to dismiss an indictment for a violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause de novo. United States v. Meza-Soria, 935 F.2d 166, 167 (9th Cir.1991); United States v. Schwartz, 785 F.2d…