Court Opinion

ID: 8712144
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-26 07:16:00.989203+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:58:20.900190
License: Public Domain

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.