Court Opinion

ID: 2964216
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:22:15.803172+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:58.383641
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          July 29, 1996
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 95-2369

                                 LIONEL A. LALIBERTE,

                                Petitioner, Appellant,

                                          v.

                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                Respondent, Appellee.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                   [Hon. Edward F. Harrington, U.S. District Judge]
                                               ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Selya, Cyr and Boudin,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ____________________

            Lionel Laliberte on brief pro se.
            ________________
            Donald  K. Stern,  United States Attorney, and  Shelbey D. Wright,
            ________________                                _________________
        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.   Petitioner Lionel  Laliberte appeals  from
                 __________

            the denial  of his second  motion under 28  U.S.C.    2255 to

            vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence.  To the extent he

            is contending that his  conviction and sentence are violative

            of  double   jeopardy  because  of  the   earlier  orders  of

            forfeiture, his claim  falters on the basis  of United States
                                                            _____________

            v. Ursery, ___  S. Ct. ___, 1996  WL 340815 (June 24,  1996).
               ______

            To the extent  he is contending that his forfeited properties

            were  improperly  characterized  as  "proceeds" of  his  drug

            trafficking activity  for purposes of 21  U.S.C.   881(a)(6),

            his  claim  has already  been rejected  by  this court.   See
                                                                      ___

            United  States  v. Parcels  of Land,  903  F.2d 36  (1st Cir.
            ______________     ________________

            1990).   Nor was any  such claim raised  below.  Accordingly,

            the judgment is summarily affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.
                                      ________   ___

                                         -2-