U.S. v. Warren, No. 75-4368
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, MEHRTENS; Before BROWN, Chief Judge, COLEMAN, GOLDBERG, AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, CLARK, RONEY, GEE, TJOFLAT, HILL, FAY, RUBIN and VANCE |
| Citation | 589 F.2d 254 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John L. WARREN, Jr. and Thomas A. Warren, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Docket Number | No. 75-4368 |
| Decision Date | 24 January 1979 |
Page 254
v.
John L. WARREN, Jr. and Thomas A. Warren, Defendants-Appellants.
Fifth Circuit.
Michael S. Tarre, Miami, Fla., for defendants-appellants Warren.
Daniel S. Pearson, Miami, Fla. (Court-appointed), for John L. Warren, Jr.
Sky E. Smith, Miami, Fla. (Court-appointed), for David DeFina.
Alan M. Medof, Miami, Fla. (Court-appointed), for Des. E. Schick.
Stewart E. Parsons, Florida State Hospital, Chattahoochee, Fla. (Court-appointed), for Thomas Warren.
Jack V. Eskenazi, U. S. Atty., Jamie L. Whitten, Asst. U. S. Atty., Miami, Fla., Shirley Baccus-Lobel, Asst. U. S. Atty., Dallas, Tex. (on rehearing), Louis M. Fischer, Atty., Appellate Section, Crim. Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for plaintiff-appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, MEHRTENS, Judge.
ON PETITIONS FOR REHEARING AND PETITIONS FOR REHEARING EN BANC
(Opinion August 24, 1978, 5 Cir. 1978, 578 F.2d 1058).
Before BROWN, Chief Judge, COLEMAN, GOLDBERG, AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, CLARK, RONEY, GEE, TJOFLAT, HILL, FAY, RUBIN and VANCE, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:
By its order of December 20, 1978, 586 F.2d 608 the Court en banc reserved disposition of the petition for rehearing by appellants Thomas A. Warren, and John L. Warren, Jr. for violation of 31 U.S.C.A. §§ 1058, 1101, on the concurrent sentence issue,
IT IS ORDERED that the cause with respect thereto shall be considered by the Court en banc on briefs without oral argument. The Clerk shall set a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Williams, No. 78-1725
...invalid. Id. at 289. See also United States v. Warren, 578 F.2d 1058, 1077 n.17 (5th Cir. 1978) (en banc), rehearing en banc granted, 589 F.2d 254 (5th Cir. 1979) ("The validity of an arrest depends upon the reasonableness of the officers' actions at the time of the arrest and not upon......
-
U.S. v. Warren, No. 75-4368
...on a case already once heard En banc, we granted a rehearing solely "on the concurrent sentence issue." United States v. Warren, 589 F.2d 254 (5th Cir. In the original En banc opinion, convictions for violation of 31 U.S.C.A. §§ 1058, 1101, were affirmed under the concurrent sente......
-
Bloudell v. Wailuku Sugar Co., No. 8474
...supra; United States v. Warren, 578 F.2d 1058 (5th Cir.1978), reh'g denied, in part, reserved, in part, 586 F.2d 608, reh'g granted, 589 F.2d 254. However, although the exclusion is generally a matter of right, the trial judge retains a measure of discretion in the application of the rule's......
-
United States v. Taylor, No. CR-80-21.
...v. Warren, 578 F.2d 1058 (5th Cir. 1978) (en banc), rehearing en banc denied in part, 586 F.2d 608, 609 (5th Cir.), granted in part, 589 F.2d 254 (5th Cir. 1979), found the Coast Guard statute constitutional and held that authority to apprehend and board a vessel is plenary when exercised b......
-
U.S. v. Williams, No. 78-1725
...invalid. Id. at 289. See also United States v. Warren, 578 F.2d 1058, 1077 n.17 (5th Cir. 1978) (en banc), rehearing en banc granted, 589 F.2d 254 (5th Cir. 1979) ("The validity of an arrest depends upon the reasonableness of the officers' actions at the time of the arrest and not upon......
-
U.S. v. Warren, No. 75-4368
...on a case already once heard En banc, we granted a rehearing solely "on the concurrent sentence issue." United States v. Warren, 589 F.2d 254 (5th Cir. In the original En banc opinion, convictions for violation of 31 U.S.C.A. §§ 1058, 1101, were affirmed under the concurrent sente......
-
Bloudell v. Wailuku Sugar Co., No. 8474
...supra; United States v. Warren, 578 F.2d 1058 (5th Cir.1978), reh'g denied, in part, reserved, in part, 586 F.2d 608, reh'g granted, 589 F.2d 254. However, although the exclusion is generally a matter of right, the trial judge retains a measure of discretion in the application of the rule's......
-
United States v. Taylor, No. CR-80-21.
...v. Warren, 578 F.2d 1058 (5th Cir. 1978) (en banc), rehearing en banc denied in part, 586 F.2d 608, 609 (5th Cir.), granted in part, 589 F.2d 254 (5th Cir. 1979), found the Coast Guard statute constitutional and held that authority to apprehend and board a vessel is plenary when exercised b......