Soffar v. Johnson
Decision Date | 31 May 2001 |
Docket Number | No. 98-20385,98-20385 |
Citation | 253 F.3d 227 |
Parties | (5th Cir. 2001) MAX ALEXANDER SOFFAR, Petitioner-Appellant v. GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
(Opinion December 21, 2000, 5 Cir., 2000, 237 F.3d 411)
Before KING, Chief Judge, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, WIENER, BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, STEWART, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
A member of the Court in active service having requested a poll on the petition for rehearing en banc filed by Gary L. Johnson, and a majority of the judges in active service having voted in favor of granting the rehearing en banc,
IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Jackson v. Litscher
... ... 3 ... Page 859 ... In Soffar v. Johnson, 237 F.3d 411 (5th Cir.2000), petition for rehearing en banc granted, 253 F.3d 227 (5th Cir.2001), the defendant asked the ... ...
-
Soffar v. Cockrell
... ... § 2254. A panel of this court, construing Soffar's petition as a request for a certificate of appealability ("COA") under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA"), Pub.L. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1269, granted him a COA on three of his claims. See Soffar v. Johnson, 237 F.3d 411 (5th Cir.2000), reh'g en banc granted, 253 F.3d 227 (5th Cir.2001). The panel resolved one of Soffar's claims on the merits, concluding that he had made a substantial showing of the denial of his Fifth Amendment rights. The panel granted Soffar habeas relief on this issue, holding ... ...
-
Burdine v. Johnson
... ... See note 32, supra. TheJackson exception has not been applied since Jackson was decided in July 2000, although it was cited in Clark v. Johnson, 227 F.3d 273, 283 n.4 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 1129 (2001). Cf.Soffar v. Johnson, 237 F.3d 411, 450, 452 (5th Cir. 2000) (citingJackson, but referring to "either of the two exceptions to nonretroactive applicability"), vacated, 253 F.3d 227 (5th Cir. 2001) ... Moreover, to accept Burdine's contention that the Jacksonexception applies because he ... ...
-
U.S. v. Solis
... ... See Baptiste, 264 F.3d at 586 n. 6 ... 10. United States v. Johnson, 91 F.3d 695, 697 (5th Cir.1996) (quoting United States v. Lanza, 260 U.S. 377, 382, 43 S.Ct. 141, 67 L.Ed. 314 (1922)) ... 11. United States ... ...