United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Terry L. Ramberg, Defendant-appellant, 97 F.3d 1462 (9th Cir. 1996)

 Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 97 F.3d 1462 (9th Cir. 1996) Submitted Sept. 10, 1996. *Decided Sept. 12, 1996

Before: FLETCHER, BRUNETTI and JOHN T. NOONAN, Jr., Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM** 

Terry L. Ramberg appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his criminal conviction on double jeopardy grounds. Ramberg contends that his criminal conviction violated the Double Jeopardy Clause since he had already been punished for the same conduct through prior seizure of his personal property; and that the district court erred by concluding he could not raise this issue because of his failure to file a claim in the forfeiture proceedings. These contentions are foreclosed by United States v. Ursery, 116 S. Ct. 2135 (1996). We decline to consider Ramberg's remaining contentions which were not presented to the district court and raised for the first time on appeal. See United States v. Munoz, 746 F.2d 1389, 1390 (9th Cir. 1984).

AFFIRMED.1 

 *

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

 1

Because we affirm the denial of relief under the former version of 28 U.S.C. § 2255, we do not consider whether the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 applies to this appeal

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.