LYONS v. U.S., 89-CF-250

Citation650 A.2d 183
Decision Date31 October 1994
Docket NumberNo. 89-CF-250,No. 89-CF-299,89-CF-250,89-CF-299
PartiesRichard LYONS, Appellant, Pamela K. Cooper, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee.
CourtD.C. Court of Appeals

Before: WAGNER, Chief Judge; FERREN, TERRY, STEADMAN, SCHWELB, FARRELL, KING, and SULLIVAN, Associate Judges. †.

Judge Wagner was an Associate Judge of this court at the time of argument. Her status changed to Chief Judge on June 14, 1994. *.

Associate Judge Farrell has recused himself from these cases.

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

On consideration of appellee's motion for resumption of proceedings en banc, appellee's petition for rehearing en banc, and the responses thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it appearing that the majority of the judges of this court has voted to grant the petition for rehearing en banc, it is

FURTHER ORDERED that appellee's petition for rehearing en banc is granted and that the opinion and judgment of July 28, 1994, are hereby vacated. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall schedule this matter for argument before the court sitting en banc as soon as the calendar permits. The parties may file supplemental briefs within 30 days from the date of this order.

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Thomas v. US, 91-CF-113
    • United States
    • D.C. Court of Appeals
    • November 9, 1994
  • Moore v. U.S., 00-CF-1016.
    • United States
    • D.C. Court of Appeals
    • June 21, 2007
    ... ... The contention does not persuade us ...         To prove constructive possession of drugs, weapons, or other contraband, the ... ...
  • Lyons v. US
    • United States
    • D.C. Court of Appeals
    • October 3, 1996
    ...Lyons v. United States, 645 A.2d 574 (D.C. 1994). The government once again sought rehearing en banc, which was granted. Lyons v. United States, 650 A.2d 183 (D.C.1994). Now, after additional briefing and argument on the peremptory challenge issue, the court en banc holds that errors advers......
  • Turner v. Bayly
    • United States
    • D.C. Court of Appeals
    • March 5, 1996
    ... ... Mr. Brazil has introduced one amendment, which is before us, which would clarify the phrase "6 months" to read instead "180 days," so that we would know ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT