United States v. Chalor Putchongkarrat

70 F.3d 121 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Chalor PUTCHONGKARRAT, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-50005. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 24, 1995. * Decided Nov. 3, 1995. Before: BEEZER, THOMPSON, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Chalor Putchongkarrat appeals interlocutorily the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss his criminal indictment on double jeopardy grounds. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , see United States v. Sanchez-Cobarruvias, --- F.3d ----, ----, No. 94-50581, slip. op. 11445, 11449 n. 2 (9th Cir. Sept. 12, 1995), and we affirm. 3 Putchongkarrat contends that the criminal charges should be dismissed because he has already been subjected to punishment for the same offenses through the government's "de facto" civil administrative forfeiture of currency, jewelry, personal items and various automobiles. 4 There is no…