ROE ET AL.

v.

DOE

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Thompson, 579 F.2d 1184 (10th Cir. 1978)
  …prosecution has realized that the Petite policy has been violated. See Watts v. United States, 422 U.S. 1032, 95 S.Ct. 2648, 45 L.Ed.2d 688; Ackerson v. United States, [*1191] 419 U.S. 1099, 95 S.Ct. 769, 42 L.Ed.2d 796, and Hayles v. United States, 419 U.S. 892, 95 S.Ct. 168, 42 L.Ed.2d 136. These are instances where the Government has made the request for a remand. In view of the important and fundamental nature of the Petite policy, as described in Rinaldi, and considering its origin, I would hold that…
• United States v. Martin, 574 F.2d 1359 (5th Cir. 1978)
  …gnized that Petite is an internal policy of self-restraint that should not be enforced against the government. See Fry v. United States, 5 Cir., 1978, 569 F. 2d 303, 306; United States v. Hayles, 5 Cir., 492 F. 2d 125, 126, vacated on other grounds, 419 U.S. 892, 95 S.Ct. 168, 42 L.Ed.2d 136 (1974).” (footnotes omitted) Finding no merit to appellants’ contentions on appeal, nor reversible error relative to any other aspect of the case, we AFFIRM the judgments appealed from. AFFIRMED. . Ordinarily issues…