United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Joseph N. Hacken, Defendant-appellant, 94 F.3d 653 (9th Cir. 1996)

 Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 94 F.3d 653 (9th Cir. 1996)

Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 12, 1996.* Decided Aug. 22, 1996.

Before: BROWNING, SCHROEDER and RYMER, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM** 

Joseph Neil Hacken, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his criminal conviction on double jeopardy grounds. We affirm.

Hacken contends that his criminal conviction violated the Double Jeopardy Clause because he had already been punished for the same conduct through prior civil forfeiture proceedings. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Ursery, 116 S. Ct. 2135 (1996).

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 district court's denial of Hacken's motion 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.