United States v. Vera Lee Peacock, Hoyle Lamont Peacock

686 F.2d 356, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 25339
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 24, 1982
Docket80-7087
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 686 F.2d 356 (United States v. Vera Lee Peacock, Hoyle Lamont Peacock) 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. Vera Lee Peacock, Hoyle Lamont Peacock, 686 F.2d 356, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 25339 (5th Cir. 1982).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

IT IS ORDERED that the government’s petition for rehearing is GRANTED.

Part V of our opinion dealt with the forfeiture of insurance proceeds acquired by the appellants. Bound at the time by the decision in United States v. Martino, 648 F.2d 367 (5th Cir. 1981), we held that 18 U.S.C. § 1963(a) did not authorize the forfeiture of the profits of a RICO offense and reversed the district court’s forfeiture order. 654 F.2d 339 at 351-52.

After our opinion issued, the Former Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted rehearing en banc as to the portion of Martino that dealt with forfeiture. The court held that § 1963(a) does encompass “forfeiture of the income or proceeds of racketeering activity.” United States v. Martino, 681 F.2d 952, 961 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc).

Accordingly, upon our reconsideration, so much of Part V of our opinion as dealt with the scope of section 1963(a) is vacated. The district court’s forfeiture order is affirmed for the reasons stated in the Fifth Circuit’s en banc opinion in Martino. In all other respects, the panel adheres to the opinion previously issued, and appellants’ petition for rehearing is DENIED.

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

Related

United States v. Edwards
Fifth Circuit, 2002
United States v. Diaz
190 F.3d 1247 (Eleventh Circuit, 1999)
United States v. Shannon Blake Triplett
922 F.2d 1174 (Fifth Circuit, 1991)
Hutchinson v. Wickes Companies, Inc.
726 F. Supp. 1315 (N.D. Georgia, 1989)
United States v. Rafael L. Corona, Ray L. Corona
885 F.2d 766 (Eleventh Circuit, 1989)
William C. Brennan v. United States
867 F.2d 111 (Second Circuit, 1989)
United States v. Caporale
806 F.2d 1487 (Eleventh Circuit, 1986)
Eaby v. Richmond
561 F. Supp. 131 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
686 F.2d 356, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 25339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-vera-lee-peacock-hoyle-lamont-peacock-ca5-1982.