Mafnas

MEMORANDUM **

There was no double jeopardy. Mafnas received credit for the time he served in prison during the post-verdict, pre-sen-tencing period. See 18 U.S.C. § 3585 (b)(1). So, the disturbing allegations concerning the conditions at the Guam prison notwithstanding, the post- *615 verdict, pre-sentence detention was part of rather than in addition to the 235-month sentence he received as a result of his conviction. There was therefore no double punishment for a single crime to justify dismissal of the indictment, see North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 717 , 89 S.Ct. 2072 , 23 L.Ed.2d 656 (1969), overruled on other grounds by Alabama v. Smith, 490 U.S. 794, 795 , 109 S.Ct. 2201 , 104 L.Ed.2d 865 (1989), and the conviction is

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.