United States v. Jose Alfredo Carrillo-Espinoza

24 F.3d 250 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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 Alfredo CARRILLO-ESPINOZA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-10443. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted March 18, 1994. Decided May 5, 1994. Before: D.W. NELSON, BOOCHEVER, and BEEZER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Jose Carrillo-Espinoza ("Appellant") appeals the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss certain charges brought against him on double jeopardy grounds. We affirm. I. 3 On July 21, 1988, the United States filed an in rem forfeiture complaint that alleged numerous properties to constitute the "proceeds of controlled substance trafficking." United States v. Twenty Two Vehicles, No. CIV 88-496-TUC-WEB (D.Ariz. July 21, 1988). According to Appellant, the forfeiture action subsequently was settled, with Appellant agreeing not to contest the forfeiture of properties collectively valued up to $500,000. 1 4 Subsequently,…