United States v. Thomas A. Warren, John L. Warren, Jr., Des E. Schick & David Defina, 586 F.2d 608 (5th Cir. 1978). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Thomas A. Warren, John L. Warren, Jr., Des E. Schick & David Defina, 586 F.2d 608 (5th Cir. 1978). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
11 citation events across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Michael Gary Whitmire & Donald John Williams, 595 F.2d 1303 (5th Cir. 1979)
How cited ↗
Cited for
Other citing cases1 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
Thomas A. Warren, John L. Warren, Jr., Des E. Schick and David Defina
75-4368.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Dec 20, 1978.
Published opinion
586 F.2d 608
1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 6861
Published

586 F.2d 608

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Thomas A. WARREN, John L. Warren, Jr., Des E. Schick and
David DeFina, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 75-4368.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 20, 1978.

Michael S. Tarre, Miami, Fla., for Warren.

Daniel S. Pearson, Miami, Fla. (Court-appointed), for J. Warren.

Sky E. Smith, Miami, Fla. (Court-appointed), for DeFina.

Alan M. Medof, Miami, Fla. (Court-appointed), for Schick.

Stewart E. Parsons, Florida State Hospital, Chattahoochee, Fla. (Court-appointed), for T. Warren.

Jack V. Eskenazi, U.S. Atty., Jamie L. Whitten, Asst. U.S. Atty., Miami, Fla., Shirley Baccus-Lobel, Asst. U.S. Atty., Dallas, Tex. (on rehearing), Lewis M. Fischer, Atty., App. Section, Crim. Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff-appellee.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

Before BROWN, Chief Judge, THORNBERRY, COLEMAN, GOLDBERG, AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, CLARK, RONEY, GEE, TJOFLAT, HILL and FAY, Circuit Judges.[*]BY THE COURT:

1

IT IS ORDERED by the Court that the appellants' petition for rehearing of this case is DENIED as to all issues except the propriety of the application of the concurrent sentence doctrine. See United States v. Warren, 578 F.2d 1058, 1077 (5th Cir. 1978) (en banc). The Court reserves disposition of the petition for rehearing on the concurrent sentence issue.

*

Judges Simpson and Morgan were qualified members of the en banc court at the time of submission and the decision en banc in this case. Subsequently, the Omnibus Judgeship Bill, Public Law 95-486, 92 Stat. 1629 (95th Congress) was approved October 20, 1978. In view of this, they did not participate in this decision

Judges Rubin and Vance were not members of the Court at the time of the submission of this case to the Court en banc and did not desire to participate therein.