Brothers

United States v. Brothers

Good Law
245 F. App'x 579
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 25, 2007Nos. 06-30429, 06-30443California903 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

In these consolidated cases, we address the criminal appeals of Brian Barker and Amanda Brothers.

Barker contends that his conviction violates the protections of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. We disagree. First, Barker was not subject to multiple prosecutions for the “same offense.” See United States v. Saccoccia, 18 F.3d 795, 798 (9th Cir.1994). Second, Barker’s multiple punishment argument is foreclosed by Witte v. United States, 515 U.S. 389, 403-04 , 115 S.Ct. 2199 , 132 L.Ed.2d 351 (1995). Finally, the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel are not implicated in this case. See United States v. Stearns, 707 F.2d 391, 394 (9th Cir.1983).

Barker also argues that the district court erred in declining to dismiss the Superceding Billings Indictment on the ground that Barker was immune from prosecution for the charges set forth therein by the terms of his Missoula plea agreement. We review “[t]he district court’s interpretation and construction of a plea agreement ... for clear error.” United States v. Clark, 218 F.3d 1092, 1095 (9th Cir.2000). “Factual findings regarding the terms of the plea agreement are also reviewed for clear…

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.