United States v. Steven J. Samples ( 1996 )


Menu:
  •                                     ___________
    No. 95-4043
    ___________
    United States of America,               *
    *
    Appellee,                 *
    *   Appeal from the United States
    v.                                 *   District Court for the
    *   Western District of Arkansas.
    Steven J. Samples,                      *
    *         [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.                *
    ___________
    Submitted:     November 8, 1996
    Filed:   November 15, 1996
    ___________
    Before BEAM, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Steven J. Samples appeals the district court's1 denial of his 28
    U.S.C. § 2255 motion.      Samples's double jeopardy claims are foreclosed for
    the reasons set forth in United States v. Ursery, 
    116 S. Ct. 2135
    , 2148-49
    (1996) (holding civil forfeitures under 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6) and (7) are
    neither "punishment" nor criminal for purposes of Double Jeopardy Clause),
    and United States v. One 1970 36.9' Columbia Sailing Boat, 
    91 F.3d 1053
    ,
    1056 (8th Cir. 1996) (holding Ursery applies to forfeitures under §
    881(a)(4)).    Likewise, Samples's ineffective-assistance claim based on his
    counsel's failure to advise him of a possible double jeopardy defense is
    foreclosed.    Cf. Thomas v. United States, 
    951 F.2d 902
    ,
    The Honorable H. Franklin Waters, Chief Judge, United States
    District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, adopting the
    report and recommendation of the Honorable Beverly R. Stites,
    United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of
    Arkansas.
    904 (8th Cir. 1991) (per curiam) (counsel not ineffective for failing to
    raise meritless issues).   The district court properly declined to address
    the sentencing issues Samples raises in his supplemental brief.     Samples
    did not demonstrate cause and prejudice forgiving his failure to raise the
    issues on direct appeal.   See Reid v. United States, 
    976 F.2d 446
    , 448 (8th
    Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 
    507 U.S. 945
    (1993).
    Accordingly, after carefully reviewing the record, we conclude the
    district court correctly dismissed Samples's petition.
    We deny Samples's request for appointment of counsel on appeal.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-