United States v. John Arney White

Eighth Circuit

United States v. John Arney White

912 F.2d 196, 1990 WL 123089

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedAugust 23, 1990

Docket88-2750

StatusPublished

This text of 912 F.2d 196 (United States v. John Arney White) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. John Arney White, 912 F.2d 196, 1990 WL 123089 (8th Cir. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The panel opinion affirming White’s sentence was filed on November 30,1989. 890 F.2d 1033. On December 27, 1989 the Court granted White’s motion to stay consideration of his petition for rehearing with suggestion for rehearing en banc pending the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Taylor v. United States, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 2143, 109 L.Ed.2d 607. The decision of the Supreme Court in that case now has been issued. See Taylor, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 2143, 109 L.Ed.2d 607 (decided May 29, 1990).

As directed by this Court in its order of July 3,1990, the parties have filed briefs on the application of the Taylor decision to White’s enhanced sentence. Having considered the arguments of the parties, we conclude that under Taylor White’s sentence was properly enhanced under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) on the basis of his 1980, 1981, and 1982 convictions in Missouri for burglary second degree. Taylor makes it clear that these burglary convictions are burglary offenses within the meaning of § 924(e).

Accordingly, White’s petition for rehearing by the panel is denied.

*197 ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

Appellant’s suggestion for rehearing en banc has been considered by the court and is denied by reason of the lack of a majority of the active judges voting to rehear the case en banc.

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

ORDER

The panel opinion affirming White’s sentence was filed on November 30,1989. 890 F.2d 1033. On December 27, 1989 the Court granted White’s motion to stay consideration of his petition for rehearing with suggestion for rehearing en banc pending the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Taylor v. United States, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 2143, 109 L.Ed.2d 607. The decision of the Supreme Court in that case now has been issued. See Taylor, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 2143, 109 L.Ed.2d 607 (decided May 29, 1990).

As directed by this Court in its order of July 3,1990, the parties have filed briefs on the application of the Taylor decision to White’s enhanced sentence. Having considered the arguments of the parties, we conclude that under Taylor White’s sentence was properly enhanced under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) on the basis of his 1980, 1981, and 1982 convictions in Missouri for burglary second degree. Taylor makes it clear that these burglary convictions are burglary offenses within the meaning of § 924(e).

Accordingly, White’s petition for rehearing by the panel is denied.

*197 ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

Appellant’s suggestion for rehearing en banc has been considered by the court and is denied by reason of the lack of a majority of the active judges voting to rehear the case en banc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

912 F.2d 196, 1990 WL 123089, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-john-arney-white-ca8-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack