United States v. Jerry Lee France

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Jerry Lee France

48 F.3d 1229, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 21886, 1995 WL 80208

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 27, 1995

Docket94-50499

StatusPublished

This text of 48 F.3d 1229 (United States v. Jerry Lee France) 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.

Bluebook

United States v. Jerry Lee France, 48 F.3d 1229, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 21886, 1995 WL 80208 (9th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

48 F.3d 1229
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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-Appellee,
v.
Jerry Lee FRANCE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 94-50499.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 21, 1995.*
Decided Feb. 27, 1995.

Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM**

Jerry Lee France appeals the district court's revocation of his supervised release. He contends that the Double Jeopardy Clause barred the revocation of his supervised release for having committed two bank robberies because he had already been prosecuted for the bank robberies in a separate criminal proceeding. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Soto-Olivas, No. 93-50863, slip op. 115 (9th Cir. Jan. 5, 1995), in which we held that the Double Jeopardy Clause does not preclude criminal prosecution for conduct that also serves as the basis for a revocation of supervised release.

AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

48 F.3d 1229
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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-Appellee,
v.
Jerry Lee FRANCE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 94-50499.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 21, 1995.*
Decided Feb. 27, 1995.

Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM**

Jerry Lee France appeals the district court's revocation of his supervised release. He contends that the Double Jeopardy Clause barred the revocation of his supervised release for having committed two bank robberies because he had already been prosecuted for the bank robberies in a separate criminal proceeding. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Soto-Olivas, No. 93-50863, slip op. 115 (9th Cir. Jan. 5, 1995), in which we held that the Double Jeopardy Clause does not preclude criminal prosecution for conduct that also serves as the basis for a revocation of supervised release.

AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 F.3d 1229, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 21886, 1995 WL 80208, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jerry-lee-france-ca9-1995.