Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Cottman, 96-5492 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Number: 96-5492 Visitors: 36
Filed: Apr. 21, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Opinions of the United 1998 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 4-21-1998 United States v. Cottman Precedential or Non-Precedential: Docket 96-5492 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1998 Recommended Citation "United States v. Cottman" (1998). 1998 Decisions. Paper 83. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1998/83 This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States
More
Opinions of the United 1998 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 4-21-1998 United States v. Cottman Precedential or Non-Precedential: Docket 96-5492 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1998 Recommended Citation "United States v. Cottman" (1998). 1998 Decisions. Paper 83. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1998/83 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 1998 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu. Filed April 21, 1998 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 96-5492 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. STANLEY COTTMAN, Appellant. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey D.C. Criminal Action No. 95-cr-00661 Before: SLOVITER and ROTH, Circuit Judges, LUDWIG,1 District Judge ORDER The petition for panel rehearing filed by the appellee in the above-entitled case having been submitted to the judges who participated in the decision of this court and all judges who concurred in the decision having asked for rehearing, the petition for rehearing is granted so that the panel opinion and the dissent can be amended. The amended opinion and dissent are being filed at this time. _________________________________________________________________ 1. Honorable Edmund V. Ludwig, United States District Court Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. By the Court, /s/ Jane R. Roth Circuit Judge Dated: 4/21/98 A True Copy: Teste: Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2
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