United States v. Sheldon Woods

34 F.3d 1075 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Sheldon WOODS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-50731. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted July 14, 1994. Decided Aug. 25, 1994. 1 Before: REINHARDT and NOONAN, Circuit Judges, and TANNER, District Judge. * 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Sheldon Woods appeals the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss his superseding indictment on the ground of double jeopardy. Woods claims that because he settled the criminal forfeiture count of the indictment, he cannot be prosecuted on the underlying offenses because additional punishment would constitute double jeopardy. He relies principally on Austin v. United States, 113 S.Ct. 2801, 2806 (1993), United States v. Halper, 490 U.S. 435, 448-49 (1989), and United States v. Sanchez-Escareno, 950 F.2d 193, 198, 201 (5th Cir.1991). See also United States v. $405,089.23, No. 93-55947 (9th Cir. filed Aug. __,…