United States v. Hollis Clark

622 F.2d 917, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 15231
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided July 31, 1980·No. 79-5102·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The order granting a rehearing en banc, 608 F.2d 238, is vacated as having been improvidently granted on the record before us, and the panel opinion, 598 F.2d 994, is reinstated.

GEE, Circuit Judge, with whom BROWN, CHARLES CLARK, TJOFLAT, FAY, REAVLEY, POLITZ, ANDERSON, RANDALL, TATE, SAM D. JOHNSON, and THOMAS A. CLARK, Circuit Judges, join, specially concurring.

I concur in the court’s order because no proffer was made of evidence tending to show advances in the state of polygraph art since the seminal opinion in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir. 1923), upon which our authorities are based, or the competence of polygraphic operators. Had one been made, in my view these authorities would properly be subject to reconsideration.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Hollis Clark, 622 F.2d 917, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 15231 (5th Cir. 1980).

622 F.2d 917 (United States v. Hollis Clark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Posado
Fifth Circuit, 1995
Christophersen v. Allied-Signal Corporation
939 F.2d 1106 (Fifth Circuit, 1991)
Christophersen v. Allied-Signal Corp.
939 F.2d 1106 (Fifth Circuit, 1991)
United States v. Julio Piccinonna
885 F.2d 1529 (Eleventh Circuit, 1989)
United States v. John D. Hope
714 F.2d 1084 (Eleventh Circuit, 1983)