United States v. Ballinger, 369 F.3d 1238 (11th Cir. 2004). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Ballinger, 369 F.3d 1238 (11th Cir. 2004). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
5 citation events (5 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest negative: United States v. Maxwell (ca11, 2004-10-01)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Vacated United States v. Maxwell
11th Cir. · 2004 · confidence high
We conclude ... that the proper test requires an analysis of whether the regulated activity ‘substantially affects’ interstate commerce.”); United States v. Ballinger, 312 F.3d 1264, 1270 (11th Cir. 2002), vacated by 369 F.3d 1238 (11th Cir. 2004) (awaiting rehearing en banc) (“Whereas Congress may regulate any instrumentality or channel of interstate commerce, the Constitution permits Congress to regulate only those intrastate activities which have a szibstantial effect on interstate commerce, and such regulation of purely intrastate activity reaches the outer limits of Congress’ co…
discussed Vacated United States v. James Maxwell
11th Cir. · 2004 · confidence high
We conclude ... that the proper test requires an analysis of whether the regulated activity `substantially affects' interstate commerce."); United States v. Ballinger, 312 F.3d 1264, 1270 (11th Cir. 2002), vacated by 369 F.3d 1238 (11th Cir. 2004) (awaiting rehearing en banc ) ("Whereas Congress may regulate any instrumentality or channel of interstate commerce, the Constitution permits Congress to regulate only those intrastate activities which have a substantial effect on interstate commerce, and such regulation of purely intrastate activity reaches the outer limits of Congress' commerce pow…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
Ballinger
01-14872.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
May 12, 2004.
369 F.3d 1238
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

369 F.3d 1238

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Jay Scott BALLINGER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-14872.

No. 01-15080.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

May 12, 2004.

Paul S. Kish, Fed. Pub. Def., Atlanta, GA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Amy Levin Weil, Atlanta, GA, Christopher A. Wray, U.S. Atty., Office of Dept. Atty. Gen., Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (Nos. 99-00026-CR-01-2, 01-00032-CR-01-2-WCO); William C. O'Kelley, Judge.

(Opinion Nov. 21, 2002, 312 F.3d 1264, 11th Cir.2002)

Before EDMONDSON, Chief Judge, and TJOFLAT, ANDERSON, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK, CARNES, BARKETT, HULL, MARCUS, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.[*]

BY THE COURT:

A member of this Court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestion of rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in this Court in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that the above causes shall be reheard by this court en banc. The previous panel's opinion is hereby VACATED.

Notes:

*

Honorable James C. Hill has elected to participate in further proceedings in this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(c)