Legal Opinion
United States v. Bradford
District Court, E.D. Washington
Decided May 19, 1995No. CR-92-2050-AAMPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED ORDER DENYING § 2255 MOTION
MeDONALD, District Judge.
Before the court for resolution without oral argument is petitioner’s Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody. (Ct.Rec. 84). In his motion, Bradford asserts that his criminal conviction and the civil administrative forfeiture action against his property were separate proceedings constituting multiple punishments for the same offense. Bradford argues that his criminal conviction constituted a second punishment and therefore must be vacated by this court as a violation of…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- United States v. HalperSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United States v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. BroceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Serfass v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Bartkus v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- United States v. Daniel Curtis GermanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996
- United States v. CarlosDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1995
- United States v. LaneDistrict Court, D. Maine · 1995
- State v. SelnessCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
- United States v. FalconDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.