Case ID: f-supp_875/html/1437-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ROBERT E. JONES, District Judge:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Abelardo VILLAREAL, Defendant.
    No. CR 93-286-JO.
    Civ. No. 94-1540-JO.
    United States District Court, D. Oregon.
    Jan. 27, 1995.
   ORDER

ROBERT E. JONES, District Judge:

The court has received defendant’s motion to vacate the sentence with supporting memorandum.

The defendant’s motion is denied. This court has recently ruled that a federal criminal conviction that precedes a judgment of forfeiture is not subject to challenge on double jeopardy grounds. See United States v. Martin Hobart Stanwood, 872 F.Supp. 791 (D.Or.1994) (copy attached). In this case, defendant entered a guilty plea to the criminal charges on April 13, 1994. His interest in the seized property was terminated by a judgment of forfeiture dated July 8, 1994. Under these circumstances, the criminal conviction does not constitute double jeopardy.

IT IS SO ORDERED.