United States v. Ronald Lynn Branum

Good Law
91 F.3d 155·1996 WL 393298·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 36957
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 15, 199695-30045California285 words

Opinion

Opinion

91 F.3d 155 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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 Lynn BRANUM, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-30045. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 9, 1996. * Decided July 15, 1996. Before: HUG, Chief Judge, and SCHROEDER and POOLE, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Ronald Lynn Branum appeals the district court's denial of his motion for reconsideration of the denial of his motion to vacate on double jeopardy grounds his guilty plea to one count of distribution of methamphetamine and to dismiss the indictment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 Branum contends that his criminal prosecution violated the Double Jeopardy Clause because it followed the civil forfeiture by Multnomah County, Oregon of a vehicle Branum was driving and $679. Applying the analytical framework set forth in United States v. Ursery, No. 95-345, 1996 WL 340815 (U.S. June 24, 1996), we…

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.