No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Arthur B. AVERY, Sr., and Alisa D. Avery, Defendants-Appellants
v.
Arthur B. AVERY, Sr., and Alisa D. Avery, Defendants-Appellants
84-3084.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Aug 12, 1985.
Stuart C. Markman, Tampa, Fla., for A.B. Avery., Claude H. Tison, Jr., Tampa, Fla., for A.D. Avery., Robert T. Kennedy, Asst. U.S. Atty., Tampa, Fla., Janis Kockritz, U.S. Dept, of Justice, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff-appellee.
Roney, Clark, Simpson.
Published
[*1495] PER CURIAM:
On petition for panel rehearing, appellant Arthur Avery urges that we failed to analyze the prosecutor’s alleged improper vouching remarks in the context of the entire trial as required by United States v. Young, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 1038, 84 L.Ed.2d 1 (1985). Even assuming the prosecutor’s remarks exceeded permissible bounds, we would still conclude that any error was harmless. United States v. Hasting, 461 U.S. 499, 103 S.Ct. 1974, 76 L.Ed.2d 96 (1983); United States v. Young, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 1038, 1045 n. 10, 84 L.Ed.2d 1 (1985).
IT IS ORDERED that the petition for rehearing by appellant Arthur B. Avery, Sr., filed in the above entitled and numbered cause be and the same is hereby DENIED.