United States v. Oucho Saelee

94 F.3d 654 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Oucho SAELEE, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-36157. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 6, 1996. * Decided Aug. 9, 1996. Before: WRIGHT, BEEZER and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Oucho Saelee appeals the district court's denial of his motion to vacate sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253, and we affirm. 3 We review the district court's denial of Saelee's § 2255 motion de novo. United States v. Roberts, 5 F.3d 365, 368 (9th Cir.1993). 4 * Saelee argues that the forfeiture of his vehicle pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981 and the imposition of his sentence subjected him to double punishment in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause. The Supreme Court recently held that in rem civil forfeitures pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981 (a)(1)(A) do not…