USA vs. Celestine, (5th Cir. 2006)
Linked as:
Text
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
February 9, 2006
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-31072
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
TELLY GALLIEN,
Defendant-Appellant
(Consolidated with)
No. 04-31075
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
versus
TRAVIS GALLIEN,
Defendant-Appellant
(Consolidated with)
No. 04-31077
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
versus
SIDNEY GALLIEN, Defendant-Appellant (Consolidated with) Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee versus GEORGE CELESTINE, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 6:01-CR-60127-5 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:* In this consolidated appeal, George Celestine, Telly Gallien, Travis Gallien, and Sidney Gallien appeal the denial of their motion to dismiss the case against them, which was based on double jeopardy grounds, following a mistrial. The defendants argue that the prosecution intentionally provoked them into moving for a * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. mistrial and that the district court erred by misapplying the principles given in Oregon v. Kennedy,456 U.S. 667 (1982).
The appellants have not shown that the district court's denial of their motion to dismiss was erroneous. The district court's finding that the prosecution did not intentionally provoke the defendants into moving for a mistrial was not clearly erroneous.
See Kennedy, 456 U.S. at 675-76; United States v. Gonzalez, 76 F.3d 1339, 1342 (5th Cir. 1996). To the contrary, the record strongly supports the district court's findings concerning the inadvertence of the error that led to the mistrial and the parties' desires, or lack thereof, for the mistrial. Our review of the record and the district court's detailed reasons for judgment also refutes the appellants' contention that the denial of their motion was grounded in a misapplication of Kennedy.
The appellants have shown no error in the judgment of the district court. Accordingly, that judgment is AFFIRMED.
Sponsored links
This document cites
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel Gonzalez and Jose Francisco Gomez, Defendants-Appellants., 76 F.3d 1339 (5th Cir. 1996)
- U.S. Supreme Court - Oregon v. Kennedy, 456 U.S. 667 (1982)
See other documents that cite the same legislation
