United States v. James Neavill, 877 F.2d 1394 (8th Cir. 1989). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. James Neavill, 877 F.2d 1394 (8th Cir. 1989). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
17 citation events across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest negative: United States v. Allan Blume, Toby Pett, Roger Ward, David Bianchini (ca2, 1992-06-10)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited "but see" United States v. Allan Blume, Toby Pett, Roger Ward, David Bianchini (5×) also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
2d Cir. · 1992 · signal: but cf. · confidence high
But cf. United States v. Neavill, 868 F.2d 1000 , vacated, reh’g en banc granted, 877 F.2d 1394 , appeal dismissed en banc, 886 F.2d 220 (8th Cir.1989).
discussed Cited "but see" United States v. Terrance Frank (2×)
9th Cir. · 1992 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see United States v. Neavill, 868 F.2d 1000 (8th Cir.), vacated, reh'g en banc granted, 877 F.2d 1394 (8th Cir.), appeal dismissed, 886 F.2d 220 (8th Cir.1989) (dismissed upon request of defendant; original opinion held that defendant was entitled to the instruction because of the Act). 101 The majority refers first to the sanctity of separation between judge and jury functions.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
James Neavill
87-2692.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Jun 21, 1989.
877 F.2d 1394
Published

877 F.2d 1394

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
James NEAVILL, Appellant.

No. 87-2692-EM.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

June 21, 1989.

ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR
REHEARING EN BANC

1

Appellee's petition for rehearing with suggestion for rehearing en banc has been considered by the Court and is hereby granted. The Court's opinion of March 1, 1989, 868 F.2d 1000 (1989), is vacated. The Clerk of this Court is directed to set the case for en banc argument during the September 1989 session of court. The parties may file supplemental pleadings limited to not more than fifteen (15) pages and any arguments contained therein shall not duplicate any of the previously advanced arguments.

2

The motion to appoint new counsel and the motion for release pending appeal have also been considered by the Court and both motions are denied.