United States v. William D. Riggs

Eleventh Circuit

United States v. William D. Riggs

720 F.2d 1227, 1983 U.S. App. LEXIS 14836

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit·Decided December 2, 1983·No. 82-5494·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The United States says that appellant’s appeal is moot, and appellant says it is not. We are not able to determine from the record before us whether appellant will suffer adverse legal consequences that will cause his appeal not to be moot. See Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784, 89 S.Ct. 2056, 23 L.Ed.2d 707 (1969).

We, therefore, REMAND the case to the district court for the limited purpose of consideration of mootness. The court may conduct an evidentiary hearing on the matter, if necessary. See e.g., Dupris v. U.S., 446 U.S. 980, 100 S.Ct. 2959, 64 L.Ed.2d 836 (1980); Vitek v. Jones, 436 U.S. 407, 98 S.Ct. 2276, 56 L.Ed.2d 381 (1978); Patterson v. Warner, 415 U.S. 303, 94 S.Ct. 1026, 39 L.Ed.2d 343 (1974); Spomer v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 514, 94 S.Ct. 685, 38 L.Ed.2d 694 (1974); Foley v. Blair & Co., 414 U.S. 212, 94 S.Ct. 405, 38 L.Ed.2d 422 (1973); City of Waco v. EPA, 620 F.2d 84 (5th Cir.1980). The district court’s findings shall be certified to this court as a supplemental record. Jurisdiction is retained for all other purposes.

REMANDED.

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

PER CURIAM:

The United States says that appellant’s appeal is moot, and appellant says it is not. We are not able to determine from the record before us whether appellant will suffer adverse legal consequences that will cause his appeal not to be moot. See Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784, 89 S.Ct. 2056, 23 L.Ed.2d 707 (1969).

We, therefore, REMAND the case to the district court for the limited purpose of consideration of mootness. The court may conduct an evidentiary hearing on the matter, if necessary. See e.g., Dupris v. U.S., 446 U.S. 980, 100 S.Ct. 2959, 64 L.Ed.2d 836 (1980); Vitek v. Jones, 436 U.S. 407, 98 S.Ct. 2276, 56 L.Ed.2d 381 (1978); Patterson v. Warner, 415 U.S. 303, 94 S.Ct. 1026, 39 L.Ed.2d 343 (1974); Spomer v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 514, 94 S.Ct. 685, 38 L.Ed.2d 694 (1974); Foley v. Blair & Co., 414 U.S. 212, 94 S.Ct. 405, 38 L.Ed.2d 422 (1973); City of Waco v. EPA, 620 F.2d 84 (5th Cir.1980). The district court’s findings shall be certified to this court as a supplemental record. Jurisdiction is retained for all other purposes.

REMANDED.

United States v. William D. Riggs, 720 F.2d 1227, 1983 U.S. App. LEXIS 14836 (11th Cir. 1983).

Pincite

720 F.2d 1227 (United States v. William D. Riggs) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related