United States v. Julio Piccinonna

Eleventh Circuit

United States v. Julio Piccinonna

861 F.2d 639, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 18654, 1988 WL 126916

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedNovember 28, 1988

Docket86-5335

StatusPublished

This text of 861 F.2d 639 (United States v. Julio Piccinonna) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh 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. Julio Piccinonna, 861 F.2d 639, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 18654, 1988 WL 126916 (11th Cir. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING IN BANC

(Opinion August 28, 1988, 11th Cir., 1988, 858 F.2d 743).

Before RONEY, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, HILL, FAY, VANCE, KRAVITCH, JOHNSON, HATCHETT, ANDERSON, CLARK, EDMONDSON and COX, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

A member of this court in active service having requested a poll on the application for rehearing in banc and a majority of the judges in this court in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing in banc,

IT IS ORDERED that the above cause shall be reheard by this court in banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of in banc briefs. The previous panel’s opinion is hereby VACATED.

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