![]() Under the "same element" test, a court must consider whether one prosecution "requires proof of a fact which the other does not." Blockburger v. The Court instructed in Grady, that a federal court faced with double jeopardy challenge must first apply the traditional Blockburger "same element" test. § 5324.Įlgersma argues that prosecution under the Montana indictment is barred by the double jeopardy principle announced by the Supreme Court's decision in Grady v. § 215 and illegal structuring financial transactions in violation of 31 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 854 bribery of a bank officer in violation of 18 U.S.C. ![]() § 854 conspiracy to invest drug profits in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 1344 investment of drug profits in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 1952 bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957 interstate travel in aid of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956 racketeering transactions in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. ![]() In a second superceding indictment filed June 21, 1991, the grand jury charged Elgersma with the following crimes: racketeering conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. Elgersma and Robert Serry were the only persons named in the Montana indictment who were also indicted in the District Court for the Middle District of Florida. On January 18, 1991, a federal grand jury in the District Court for the District of Montana, indicted Elgersma and codefendants for multiple counts related to racketeering. We also hold that a single conspiracy was not divided into multiple prosecutions.I. ![]() We affirm because we conclude that Elgersma has not been placed in double jeopardy, and the doctrine of collateral estoppel is not applicable under these facts. Elgersma argues that the Montana prosecution is barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment because (1) the Montana indictment charges him with the same conduct for which he was convicted in the District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Florida indictment) (2) the Montana and Florida indictments divide a single conspiracy into multiple prosecutions and (3) the doctrine of collateral estoppel prohibits subsequent litigation of issues that have been finally determined. Elgersma appeals from the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss a second superceding indictment in the District Court for the District of Montana (Montana indictment) charging him with racketeering conspiracy, racketeering, money laundering, illicit monetary transactions, illicit interstate travel, bank fraud, investment of drug profits, conspiracy to invest drug profits, bribery, and structuring illegal financial transactions. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |