United States v. Carlton Ellis Allison, 487 F.2d 339 (5th Cir. 1973). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Carlton Ellis Allison, 487 F.2d 339 (5th Cir. 1973). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
40 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 16 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Buttram (pawd, 1977-06-01) · Strongest negative: Sotola v. State (fladistctapp, 1983-08-04)
Treatment trajectory · 1975 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1975 2000 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "but see" Sotola v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1983 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see, United States v. Allison, 481 F.2d 468, 472 (5th Cir.), aff'd. after remand, 487 F.2d 339 (5th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 982 , 94 S.Ct. 2383 , 40 L.Ed.2d 759 (1974).
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Buttram
W.D. Pa. · 1977 · confidence medium
Indeed, as indicated in Dutton the federal evidentiary rules of hearsay may be more stringent than the constitutional limits embodied in the Sixth Amendment.” 487 F.2d at 339-40.
discussed Cited "see" United States v. James Hillard, Robert Allen and Samuel Hillard
2d Cir. · 1983 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord, United States v. Allison, 481 F.2d 468, 472 (5th Cir.), aff’d after remand, 487 F.2d 339 (5th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 982 , 94 S.Ct. 2383 , 40 L.Ed.2d 759 (1974); cf. United States v. Evans, supra, 635 F.2d 1124, 1127-28 (defendant may stipulate to substitution after deliberations have begun); Leser v. United States, 358 F.2d 313, 317 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 802 , 87 S.Ct. 10 , 17 L.Ed.2d 49 (1966) (same).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Floyd Rideau, and Highlands Insurance Co., Intervenor-Appellant v. Parkem Industrial Services, Inc.
5th Cir. · 1990 · signal: see also · confidence low
Co., 682 F.Supp. 1434, 1447 (N.D.Ill.1988); see also United States v. Allison, 481 F.2d 468, 472 (5th Cir.) (calling the analogous criminal rule on discharging alternates “a mandatory requirement that should be scrupulously followed”), aff'd after remand, 487 F.2d 339 (5th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 982 , 94 S.Ct. 2383 , 40 L.Ed.2d 759 (1974).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Commonwealth v. Smith (2×)
Mass. · 1988 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also United States v. Allison, 481 F.2d 468, 472 (5th Cir.), aff'd after remand, 487 F.2d 339 (5th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 982 (1974), in which the court concluded that an alternate juror's attendance at jury deliberations, even though the juror had been instructed not to participate, was reviewable on appeal in spite of counsel's agreement to the procedure.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Kenneth W. Kaminski, United States of America v. Stephen E. Mount, United States of America v. George P. Fahr, United States of America v. John M. Brownrigg, United States of America v. Douglas C. Payne
8th Cir. · 1982 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., United States v. Allison, 481 F.2d 468 (5th Cir. 1973), aff'd after remand, 487 F.2d 339 (5th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 982 , 94 S.Ct. 2383 , 40 L.Ed.2d 759 (1974); United States v. Phillips, 664 F.2d 971 (5th Cir. 1981); United States v. Watson, 669 F.2d 1374 (11th Cir. 1982); see also Johnson v. Duckworth, 650 F.2d 122 (7th Cir. 1981) (in state court, trial alternate's presence during jury deliberations did not deny appellants a fair trial).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Kaminski
8th Cir. · 1982 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., United States v. Allison, 481 F.2d 468 (5th Cir. 1973), aff’d after remand, 487 F.2d 339 (5th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 982 , 94 S.Ct. 2383 , 40 L.Ed.2d 759 (1974); United States v. Phillips, 664 F.2d 971 (5th Cir. 1981); United States v. Watson, 669 F.2d 1374 (11th Cir. 1982); see also Johnson v. Duckworth, 650 F.2d 122 (7th Cir. 1981) (in state court, trial alternate’s presence during jury deliberations did not deny appellants a fair trial).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Carlton Ellis ALLISON Et Al., Defendants-Appellants
72-2828.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Nov 13, 1973.
487 F.2d 339
Arthur J. Hanes, Sr., Birmingham, Ala., for Allison and Perry., J. Terry Huffstutler, Jr., Guntersville, Ala., for Holladay., Robert B. French, Jr., Fort Payne, Ala., for Ralph Marquez., James R. Venable, Decatur, Ga., for Bryant, Denson and Robinson., Larry L. Debus, Phoenix, Ariz., for M. Marquez., Wayman G. Sherrer, U. S.. Atty., Albert C. Bowen, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Birmingham, Ala., for plaintiff-appellee.
Brown, Coleman, Dyer.
Cited by 34 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

This Dyer Act ease was remanded to the district court for a limited posLtrial hearing to determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that the presence of the alternate juror during the jury’s deliberations affected the jury’s verdict. The factual circumstances requiring the remand order and the directions given to the district court for an evidentiary hearing appear in our prior opinion, United States v. Allison, etc., 5 Cir. 1973, 481 F.2d 468.

The trial judge has conducted an evi-dentiary hearing, the transcript thereof and the court’s findings and conclusions have been certified to us. The parties were requested to but have declined to file briefs on the remand issue. In the hearing each juror and the alternate was interrogated out of the presence of the other jurors. Following the hearing the trial judge entered an order containing detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law.

The procedures followed by the trial judge and the standards employed by him complied with our remand directions. We find no error in the trial judge’s conclusion that there is no reasonable possibility that the presence of the alternate juror during the jury’s deliberations affected the verdict.

The findings and conclusions of the district court on remand are affirmed. This requires that the convictions be, and they hereby are

Affirmed.