United States v. Ronald L. Lingenfelter, United States of America v. Gary H. Marolf, United States of America v. Lawrance A. Morgan

89 F.3d 847 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Ronald L. LINGENFELTER, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gary H. MAROLF, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lawrance A. MORGAN, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 95-56280, 95-56281 and 95-56313. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted June 4, 1996. Decided July 09, 1996. Before: FLETCHER, BEEZER and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Ronald Lingenfelter, Gary Marolf and Lawrance Morgan appeal the district court's denials of their motions to vacate their sentences under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . They argue that the administrative forfeitures of certain property and their subsequent sentences for conspiracy to import marijuana constituted double punishment in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause. 3 After the submission of this appeal, the Supreme Court held that civil…