United States v. Shepard

78 F. App'x 387
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedOctober 20, 2003
Docket03-40124
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 78 F. App'x 387 (United States v. Shepard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth 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. Shepard, 78 F. App'x 387 (5th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

*388 PER CURIAM. *

David L. Shepard (“Shepard”), federal prisoner #02124-593, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment charging him with assault with a dangerous weapon and possession of a weapon by an inmate. Shepard argues that the criminal prosecution against him is barred by double jeopardy because he was charged in a prison disciplinary proceeding for the same actions which are charged in the indictment. Shepard further contends that the Government is collaterally estopped from bringing the charges because he was not found guilty of serious assault or possession of a weapon in the prison disciplinary proceedings.

Shepard’s double jeopardy claim is meritless because “prison disciplinary hearings do not bar future criminal prosecutions.” United States v. Galan, 82 F.3d 639, 640 (5th Cir.1996). Shepard’s collateral estoppel argument is similarly frivolous. To the extent he raises the collateral estoppel claim under the Double Jeopardy Clause, it is unavailing. See id. To the extent that he raises it independently, it is not cognizable. See Stringer v. Williams, 161 F.3d 259, 263-64 (5th Cir.1998).

As all of Shepard’s claims are clearly precluded by established precedent, the appeal is frivolous and we dismiss it as such. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

Related

United States v. Daniel
Fifth Circuit, 2007

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 F. App'x 387, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-shepard-ca5-2003.