Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

James Stanley Pipes v. United States, 24965_1 (1968)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 24965_1 Visitors: 160
Filed: Nov. 01, 1968
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 402 F.2d 271 James Stanley PIPES, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 24965. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit. Nov. 1, 1968. Neil Heimanson, Atlanta, Ga., for appellant. Theodore E. Smith, Asst. U.S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for appellee. Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge, and AINSWORTH and GODBOLD, Circuit judges. ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC PER CURIAM: 1 The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service of the C
More

402 F.2d 271

James Stanley PIPES, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 24965.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

Nov. 1, 1968.

Neil Heimanson, Atlanta, Ga., for appellant.

Theodore E. Smith, Asst. U.S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for appellee.

Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge, and AINSWORTH and GODBOLD, Circuit judges.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

PER CURIAM:

1

The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service of the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12), the Petition for Rehearing En Banc in denied. (See opinion at 5 Cir., 399 F.2d 471).

GODBOLD, Circuit Judge:

2

I concurred in the result of this case, therefore I concur in the denial of the petition for rehearing. In so doing I do not recede from, but reiterate, the views already expressed in my separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

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