Govt of VI v. Diaz , 131 F. App'x 873 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                                                            Opinions of the United
    2005 Decisions                                                                                                             States Court of Appeals
    for the Third Circuit
    5-24-2005
    Govt of VI v. Diaz
    Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
    Docket No. 04-4773
    Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005
    Recommended Citation
    "Govt of VI v. Diaz" (2005). 2005 Decisions. Paper 1140.
    http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005/1140
    This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
    University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2005 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
    University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
    NOT PRECEDENTIAL
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 04-4773
    ___________
    GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
    v.
    WILFREDO DIAZ,
    Appellant.
    ___________
    On Appeal from the District Court of the Virgin Islands
    (D.C. No. 03-cr-00007)
    District Judge: The Honorable Raymond L. Finch
    District Judge: The Honorable Thomas K. Moore
    Territorial Judge: Ive A. Swan
    ___________
    Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
    April 19, 2005
    Before: NYGAARD, RENDELL, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    (Filed May 24, 2005)
    ___________
    OPINION OF THE COURT
    ___________
    NYGAARD, Circuit Judge.
    Wilfredo Diaz appeals from the denial of his motion to dismiss the criminal
    charges against him. We will affirm.
    While Diaz was incarcerated at the Golden Grove Correctional Facility in St.
    Croix, Virgin Islands, prison officials charged him with violating prison regulations by
    repeatedly stabbing another inmate with a knife. The Bureau of Corrections Disciplinary
    Committee held a hearing after which it found Diaz guilty of violating prison regulations and
    placed him in administrative segregation for fifty-five days. For the stabbing, the Government
    then charged Diaz with assault in the third degree and with possession of a dangerous weapon.
    Diaz filed a motion to dismiss, which the Territorial Court denied. He went to trial and was
    found guilty on both counts.
    Diaz argues that because he had already been tried and sanctioned by prison
    officials for the stabbing, the Government’s attempt to prosecute him violated the Double
    Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. His argument is foreclosed by our decision in United
    States v. Newby, 
    11 F.3d 1143
     (3d Cir. 1993). In Newby, we held that “a prison disciplinary
    hearing is not a prosecution for Double Jeopardy Clause purposes. Disciplinary sanctions
    imposed by prison authorities for infractions of prison regulations do not bar a subsequent
    criminal prosecution.” 
    Id. at 1144
     (citation omitted). Other Courts of Appeal to address the
    issue are in agreement. See United States v. Galan, 
    82 F.3d 639
    , 640 (5th Cir. 1996); United
    States v. Brown, 
    59 F.3d 102
    , 105 (9th Cir. 1995); United States v. Hernandez-Fundora, 
    58 F.3d
                                                   2
    802, 807 (2d Cir. 1995); United States v. Rising, 
    867 F.2d 1255
    , 1259 (10th Cir. 1989); Kerns v.
    Paratt, 
    672 F.2d 690
     (8th Cir. 1982). Thus, Diaz’s argument fails as a matter of law.
    Accordingly, we affirm the Territorial Court’s order denying the motion to
    dismiss.