United States v. Marcus Wadley

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Marcus Wadley

83 F.3d 108, 1996 WL 226785

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 2, 1996

Docket94-10573

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 83 F.3d 108 (United States v. Marcus Wadley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth 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. Marcus Wadley, 83 F.3d 108, 1996 WL 226785 (5th Cir. 1996).

Pincite

Opinions

ON SUGGESTION FOB REHEARING EN BANC

Before DAVIS and WIENER, Circuit Judges, and VANCE *, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Treating the Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc as a Petition for Panel Rehearing, the Petition for Panel Rehearing is DENIED. The Court having been polled at the request of one of the members of the Court and a majority of the Judges who are in regular active service not having voted in favor (FRAP and Local Rule 35), the Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED.

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

ON SUGGESTION FOB REHEARING EN BANC

Before DAVIS and WIENER, Circuit Judges, and VANCE *, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Treating the Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc as a Petition for Panel Rehearing, the Petition for Panel Rehearing is DENIED. The Court having been polled at the request of one of the members of the Court and a majority of the Judges who are in regular active service not having voted in favor (FRAP and Local Rule 35), the Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 F.3d 108, 1996 WL 226785, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-marcus-wadley-ca5-1996.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack