Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
United States v. Jerry L. Grist
Citations: 112 F.3d 451; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 8553; 1997 WL 200032Docket: 96-6331
Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit; April 24, 1997; Federal Appellate Court
Jerry Lee Grist's appeal from the denial of his petition to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was addressed by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. Grist claimed that his consent to a judicial forfeiture of his property precluded his conviction on the related substantive count due to double jeopardy protections under the Fifth Amendment. He acknowledged that he did not contest the forfeiture in district court and argued that his guilty plea should have been barred by double jeopardy. The court referenced its precedent, stating that a person is not in jeopardy from a judicial forfeiture unless they contest it, as established in United States v. Hardwell and United States v. German. Grist further contended he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to raise the double jeopardy issue before his guilty plea and on direct appeal. The court concluded that since the double jeopardy argument was not viable at the time, the attorney's failure to raise it could not constitute ineffective assistance. As a result, the court found that Grist had not preserved the double jeopardy issue, leading to the dismissal of his appeal due to a lack of justiciable questions. The certificate of appealability was denied, and prior orders regarding the payment of a filing fee were vacated.