United States v. Felipe Padilla Gomez, United States of America v. Rufina Canedo Serrano, United States of America v. Miguel Nagera Rodriguez, United States of America v. Omaria Betancourt

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NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Felipe Padilla GOMEZ, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rufina Canedo SERRANO, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Nagera RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Omaria BETANCOURT, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 93-50017, 93-50021, 93-50018 and 93-50020. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 4, 1994. * Decided May 10, 1994. 1 Before: KOZINSKI and TROTT, Circuit Judges, and WILLIAMS, ** District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM * 3 Defendants argue their federal prosecutions for conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute are barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause because each of them previously pleaded guilty in state court to the underlying substantive offenses. However, the United States Supreme Court has held that the "prosecution…