United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Enrique Canman Machado, Defendant-appellant, 70 F.3d 1281 (9th Cir. 1995)
Annotate this CaseBefore: PREGERSON, NORRIS and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Enrique Canman Machado appeals the district court's affirmance of his conviction before a magistrate judge for possession of marijuana. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Machado contends that his criminal conviction violated the Double Jeopardy Clause because he had already been subjected to punishment for the same conduct through the government's uncontested administrative forfeiture proceedings. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Cretacci, 62 F.3d 307 (9th Cir. 1995), in which we held that the administrative forfeiture of unclaimed property does not constitute punishment for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause.
AFFIRMED.
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.