United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Phillip Marsh; Marlene Marsh, Defendants-appellants, 73 F.3d 371 (9th Cir. 1995)

 Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 73 F.3d 371 (9th Cir. 1995) Submitted Dec. 19, 1995. *Decided Dec. 27, 1995

Before: SNEED, TROTT and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM** 

Phillip and Marlene Marsh interlocutorily appeal the district court's denial of their motion to dismiss the criminal indictment against them on double jeopardy grounds. We have jurisdiction, United States v. Chick, 61 F.3d 682, 684-86 (9th Cir. 1995), and we affirm.

The Marshes contend that the criminal indictment violates the Double Jeopardy Clause because they were also subjected to punishment for the same conduct through the Internal Revenue Service's non-final contested administrative forfeiture proceedings. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Sanchez-Cobarruvias, 65 F.3d 781, 783-84 (9th Cir. 1995), in which we held that there must be a final decision in a civil administrative forfeiture proceeding before double jeopardy attaches. Accordingly, the district court's order is

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

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.