United States v. Rudolph R. Nordquest
This text of 95 F.3d 1159 (United States v. Rudolph R. Nordquest) 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
95 F.3d 1159
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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.
Rudolph R. NORDQUEST, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 95-36165.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 12, 1996.*
Decided Aug. 19, 1996.
Before: BROWNING, SCHROEDER, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Rudolph R. Nordquest, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to two counts of armed bank robbery (18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d)) and two counts of use of a firearm during a crime of violence (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)). Nordquest contends that the imposition of consecutive sentences for his § 2113 and § 924(c) convictions based on the same set of facts violates the Double Jeopardy Clause. We have previously rejected this contention. See United States v. Browne, 829 F.2d 760, 767 (9th Cir.1987)., cert. denied, 485 U.S. 991 (1988).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
95 F.3d 1159, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 38282, 1996 WL 471778, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-rudolph-r-nordquest-ca9-1996.