Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Sokolow, 95-1292,95-1367 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Number: 95-1292,95-1367 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jul. 26, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Opinions of the United 1996 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 7-26-1996 United States v. Sokolow Precedential or Non-Precedential: Docket 95-1292,95-1367 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1996 Recommended Citation "United States v. Sokolow" (1996). 1996 Decisions. Paper 202. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1996/202 This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the Unit
More
Opinions of the United 1996 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 7-26-1996 United States v. Sokolow Precedential or Non-Precedential: Docket 95-1292,95-1367 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1996 Recommended Citation "United States v. Sokolow" (1996). 1996 Decisions. Paper 202. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1996/202 This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 1996 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ Nos. 95-1292/1367 ___________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. CRAIG B. SOKOLOW, Appellant ___________ ORDER Present: MANSMANN and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI, Judge, Court of International Trade.* It is hereby ORDERED that the opinion dated April 18, 1996, in the above case is hereby vacated. It is further ORDERED that the petition for panel rehearing filed by appellant in the above entitled case having been submitted to the judges who participated in the decision of this court, and no judge who concurred in the decision having asked for rehearing, is denied. It is further ORDERED that the Clerk shall file the enclosed opinion. BY THE COURT, Carol Los Mansmann Circuit Judge Dated: July 26, 1996 * Judge Restani, who sat by designation on the original panel, is limited to voting for panel rehearing only.
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer