REMER J. DASHER, RESPONDENT,
v.
NORMAN STRIPLING, PETITIONER
REMER J. DASHER, RESPONDENT,
NORMAN STRIPLING, PETITIONER
714 F.2d 1084
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (1983)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 18 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:
The state appeals a grant of a writ of habeas corpus by the United States District Court. A panel of this Court reversed in a divided decision. Dasher v. Stripling, 685 F. 2d 385 (11th Cir.1982). This Court took the case en banc, which resulted in the panel opinion being vacated. The judges of the en banc court are equally divided on the proper disposition of this case. Therefore, the judgment of the district court is affirmed as a matter of law, and this decision of the Court of Appeals has no precedential value. Henderson v. Fort Worth Independent School District, 584 F. 2d 115 (5th Cir. 1978) (en banc), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 906, 99 S.Ct. 1996, 60 L.Ed.2d 375 (1979).
AFFIRMED BY OPERATION OF LAW.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Mitchell, 723 F.2d 1040 (1st Cir. 1983)…that “the discretion granted to the trial court to invoke the ends of justice exception is narrow.” United States v. Perez-Reveles, 715 F. 2d 1348, 1351 (9th Cir.1983). Although we find no abuse of discretion in this instance, United States v. Hope, 714 F. 2d 1084, 1086 (11th Cir.1983); United States v. Jodoin, 672 F. 2d 232, 238 (1st Cir.1982), ex parte actions under (h)(8)(A) are red flag signals to an appellate court. We emphatically reject the argument of the government that section 5(c)(1)(B) of the Mas…
-
United States v. Jenkins, 901 F.2d 1075 (11th Cir. 1990)…determination. Id. at 469, 53 S.Ct. at 699. This Court has held that a trial judge may comment on evidence “so long as he instructs the jury that it is the sole judge of the facts and that it is not bound by his comments....” United States v. Hope, 714 F. 2d 1084, 1088 (11th Cir.1983). Of course such discretion [*1083] is not without limits; the judge may not distort or add to the evidence, and should make commentary only with great care. Quercia, 289 U.S. at 469, 53 S.Ct. at 699. The district court must be…
-
Bundy v. Dugger, 850 F.2d 1402 (11th Cir. 1988)…heir exclusion accorded with the standards set forth in Wither-spoon and its progeny. . Indeed, this Court has intimated that federal evidence law does not require that the Frye test be met prior to the admission of evidence. United States v. Hope, 714 F. 2d 1084, 1087 n. 3 (11th Cir.1983). This case, not concerning a federal conviction, presents us with no opportunity to address Hope’s intimation. . As set forth above, an evidentiary ruling is a cognizable ground for federal habeas corpus relief if it depr…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Walker v. Newgent, 441 U.S. 906 (U.S. 1979)
- Henderson v. Fort Worth Indep. Sch. Dist., 441 U.S. 906 (U.S. 1979)
- Henderson v. Fort Worth Indep. Sch. Dist., 584 F.2d 115 (5th Cir. 1978)
- United States v. Clark, 584 F.2d 115 (5th Cir. 1978)
- Remer J. Dasher v. Stripling, 685 F.2d 385 (11th Cir. 1982)