U.S. v. Hickman
| Decision Date | 20 January 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 97-40237,97-40237 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Masontae HICKMAN; Markus D. Chopane; Jyi R. McCray; Edwin T. Limbrick; Edmond Gasaway, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
John B. Stevens, Jr., Paul E. Naman, Keith Fredrick Giblin, Beaumont, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Frank Warren Henderson, Amy R. Blalock, Tyler, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas; Thad Heartfield, Judge.
ON PETITIONS FOR REHEARING EN BANC AS TO APPELLANTS MARKUS D. CHOPANE AND EDWIN T. LIMBRICK
(Opinion September 1, 1998, 5 Cir., 1998, 151 F.3d 446)
Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, DUHE, 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 petitions for rehearing en banc filed by Markus D. Chopane and Edwin T. Limbrick, and a majority of the judges in active service having voted in favor of granting the rehearings en banc; and, a majority of judges in active service having determined, on the court's own motion, to rehear the appeals of Masontae Hickman, Jyi R. McCray and Edmond Gasaway en banc,
IT IS ORDERED that these causes 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.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that under 5th Cir. R. 42.1, the mandate issued in the appeals of Masontae Hickman, Jyi R. McCray and Edmond Gasaway are recalled to prevent injustice.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Hickman
...out in the panel opinion, see United States v. Hickman, 151 F.3d 446, 460-62 (5th Cir.1998), reh'g granted and opinion vacated, 165 F.3d 1020 (5th Cir.1999), we unanimously vacate Chopane's sentence and remand for PATRICK E. HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge, with whom E. GRADY JOLLY, EDITH H. JO......
-
Montague v. State
...87 S.Ct. 1926, 18 L.Ed.2d 1149 (1967) ; United States v. Hickman , 151 F.3d 446, 459 (5th Cir. 1998), rehearing in banc granted , 165 F. 3d 1020 (1999), convictions affirmed in part and vacated in part , 179 F.3d 230 (1999) (per curiam); United States ex rel. Pierce v. Cannon , 508 F.2d 197......
-
Lawrence Alexander Jr. v. the City of Greensboro
... ... ( Id. ) Sanders said that he wanted Rankin to fail so that Wray would assign this investigation back to us. ( Id. at 6061.) Like Cuthbertson's previous allegation, these allegations fail to satisfy the adverse employment action requirement and do not ... ...
- Jones v. Sabis Educational Systems, Inc., 98 C 4252.
-
Race and national origin discrimination
...contract is neither necessary to a successful §1981 claim, nor, standing alone, sufficient to make out such a claim.” Spriggs , 165 F.3d at 1020. Supreme Court In CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries , the Supreme Court held that §1981 encompasses retaliation §3:600 Federal Employment Jury Instruc......