United States v. Douglas A. Muth

92 F.3d 1194 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Douglas A. MUTH, Defendant-Appellant. No. CV-95-00569-MFM. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 22, 1996. * Decided July 30, 1996. 1 Before: GOODWIN and SCHROEDER, Circuit Judges, and ARMSTRONG, ** District Judge. 2 ORDER *** 3 Defendant Douglas Muth appeals the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his criminal conviction for manufacture of marijuana. He contends that the conviction violated double jeopardy because of the administrative forfeiture of his currency and judicial forfeiture of his residence. We deferred submission pending the decision of the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Ursery, Nos. 95-345, 95-346, 1996 U.S. SCt WL 340815 (U.S. June 24, 1996). In Ursery, the Court held that civil forfeitures are "neither 'punishment' nor criminal for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause." Id. at 14 . We…