Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Laliberte v. United States, 95-2369 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Number: 95-2369 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jul. 29, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Circuit Judges.Lionel Laliberte on brief pro se.________________ _________________, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.Per Curiam.v. Ursery, ___ S. Ct.his claim has already been rejected by this court.United States v. Parcels of Land, 903 F.2d 36 (1st Cir.
USCA1 Opinion









July 29, 1996
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________


No. 95-2369

LIONEL A. LALIBERTE,

Petitioner, Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent, Appellee.

____________________


APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. Edward F. Harrington, U.S. District Judge] ___________________

____________________

Before

Selya, Cyr and Boudin,
Circuit Judges. ______________

____________________

Lionel Laliberte on brief pro se. ________________
Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, and Shelbey D. Wright, ________________ _________________
Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.


____________________


____________________






Per Curiam. Petitioner Lionel Laliberte appeals from __________













the denial of his second motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 to

vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. To the extent he

is contending that his conviction and sentence are violative

of double jeopardy because of the earlier orders of

forfeiture, his claim falters on the basis of United States _____________

v. Ursery, ___ S. Ct. ___, 1996 WL 340815 (June 24, 1996). ______

To the extent he is contending that his forfeited properties

were improperly characterized as "proceeds" of his drug

trafficking activity for purposes of 21 U.S.C. 881(a)(6),

his claim has already been rejected by this court. See ___

United States v. Parcels of Land, 903 F.2d 36 (1st Cir. ______________ ________________

1990). Nor was any such claim raised below. Accordingly,

the judgment is summarily affirmed. See Loc. R. 27.1. ________ ___



























-2-






Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer