United States v. Dexter D. Cross Chad C. Haynes
This text of 56 F.3d 74 (United States v. Dexter D. Cross Chad C. Haynes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
56 F.3d 74
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Dexter D. CROSS; Chad C. Haynes, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 94-10441.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 16, 1995.*
Decided May 18, 1995.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, No. CR-93-00364-VRW; Vaughn R. Walker, District Judge, Presiding.
N.D.Cal.
REVERSED.
Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, HUG and NOONAN, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
The Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar cumulative punishment for carjacking, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2119, and for using or carrying a firearm in relation to a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 924(c)(1). United States v. Martinez, No. 93-50803, slip op. 2545, 2551-55 (9th Cir. Mar. 7, 1995). Accordingly, we reverse the district court's order requiring the government to elect between the carjacking count and the firearms count.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
56 F.3d 74, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 21341, 1995 WL 306898, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-dexter-d-cross-chad-c-haynes-ca9-1995.