United States v. Richard Lee Bailey, United States of America v. John Tucker Glover, United States of America v. Pedro Blake Jane

72 F.3d 136 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Richard Lee BAILEY, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John Tucker GLOVER, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Pedro Blake JANE, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 95-10023, 95-10024, 95-10025. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 29, 1995. * Decided Dec. 12, 1995. 1 Before GOODWIN and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges, and FITZGERALD ** , District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 The sole question presented in this appeal is whether the district court erred in denying appellants' motion to dismiss their indictment based on a violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution. This court has held that a criminal prosecution following an administrative forfeiture of unclaimed property does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause. See United States v. Cretacci, 62 F.3d 307 (9th…