United States v. Frank Lee Wheeler

Good Law
87 F.3d 1325·1996 WL 337168·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 31601
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 18, 199695-56856California312 words

Opinion

Opinion

87 F.3d 1325 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Frank Lee WHEELER, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-56856. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 11, 1996. * Decided June 18, 1996. Before: CANBY, NOONAN and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Frank Lee Wheeler, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his criminal conviction on double jeopardy grounds. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , and we affirm. 1 3 Wheeler contends that his criminal conviction violated the Double Jeopardy Clause because he had already been subjected to punishment for the same conduct through the government's uncontested administrative forfeiture proceedings. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Cretacci, 62 F.3d 307 (9th Cir.1995), in which we held that the administrative forfeiture of unclaimed property does not…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.