UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
WILLIAM B. CLARK, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
PER CURIAM:
The Petition for Rehearing is DENIED and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en bane (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12), the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED.
In doing so, we note that this is a direct appeal. The court is presently considering en banc the standards to be applied in reviewing non-compliance with Rule 11 when raised by way of a habeas proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, Keel v. United States, 5 Cir. 1978, 572 F. 2d 1135, reh. en banc granted, 572 F. 2d 1137, but our adherence to the requirement of literal compliance with Rule 11 when the issue is raised by direct appeal has been firm. See, e. g., United States v. Lincecum, 5 Cir. 1978, 568 F. 2d 1229; United States v. Hart, 5 Cir. 1978, 566 F. 2d 977; United States v. Johnson, 5 Cir. 1977, 546 F. 2d 1225.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. The State OF Miss., 606 F.2d 635 (5th Cir. 1979)
-
Iranian Students Ass'n v. Edwards, 604 F.2d 352 (5th Cir. 1979)
-
Criterion Club OF Albany v. The Bd. OF Comm'rs OF Dougherty Cnty., 594 F.2d 118 (5th Cir. 1979)
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Johnson, 546 F.2d 1225 (5th Cir. 1977)
- United States v. Garland H. Lincecum and R. V. Wilson, Jr., 568 F.2d 1229 (5th Cir. 1978)
- United States v. Hart, 566 F.2d 977 (5th Cir. 1978)
- United States v. Clark, 574 F.2d 1357 (5th Cir. 1978)
- Keel v. United States, 572 F.2d 1135 (5th Cir. 1978)
- United States v. Monroe Charles Schiffman, 572 F.2d 1137 (5th Cir. 1978)