TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. John H

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John H. THOMAS and Jon-T Farms, Inc., a Corporation, Defendants-Appellants; UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John H. THOMAS, A/K/A J. H. Thomas, Defendant-Appellant

United States v. John H, 604 F.2d 450 (5th Cir. 1979)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
November 14, 1979
Docket
Nos. 78-5249, 78-5374
Judges
Gee, Vance, Hunter
Citations
604 F.2d 450
Summary
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

On rehearing, among other contentions, appellants press upon us the existence of possible collateral consequences deriving from the conversion counts, urging that these render inappropriate our disposition of those counts under the concurrent sentence doctrine. Assuming without deciding the presence of such consequences, we have reviewed appellants challenges to the convictions on the conversion counts and find them without merit except as to Count 92, the Blackstock count. As to that count, we conclude that the evidence does not support the conviction. To this extent, we therefore grant rehearing and reverse the conviction on Count 92.

The same considerations require that the cause be remanded as to the conversión counts for consideration by the court below of whether the addition of these counts, or any of them, was motivated by actual pros-ecutorial vindictiveness. To this extent as well rehearing is granted. In all other respects, it is denied.

No member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is denied.

AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART IN NO. 78-5249.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 17 cases

View all citing references →
1980: 11981: 51982: 21983: 11985: 11986: 21996: 12012: 22018: 219802026peak 1981 · 5

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. John H. Thomas, Lonnie D. Clark and John H. Thomas709 F.2d 968 (5th Cir. 1983)
  2. United States v. Walker514 F. Supp. 294 (E.D. La. 1981)
  3. United States v. Phillips664 F.2d 971 (5th Cir. 1981)
  4. United States v. Caporale806 F.2d 1487 (11th Cir. 1986)
  5. United States v. Jon-T Chemicals, Inc., and Lewis M. Overton, Jr., Receiver for Jon-T Chemicals, Inc.768 F.2d 686 (5th Cir. 1985)
  6. United States v. Jamiel Alexander Chagra669 F.2d 241 (5th Cir. 1982)

Most recent

  1. State v. Dixon238 So. 3d 1088 (La. Ct. App. 2018)
  2. State of Louisiana v. Marvin DixonNo. KA-0017-0459 (La. Ct. App. Jan. 24, 2018)
  3. State v. Leger92 So. 3d 975 (La. Ct. App. 2012)
  4. State of Louisiana v. Robert Wayne LegerNo. KA-0011-1127 (La. Ct. App. May 2, 2012)
  5. Hentz v. Hargett71 F.3d 1169 (5th Cir. 1996)
  6. United States v. James Caporale, Alfred Pilotto, Seymour A. Gopman, Bernard Rubin, George Wuagneux, Salvatore Tricario, Louis C806 F.2d 1487 (11th Cir. 1986)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. John H, 593 F.2d 615 (5th Cir. 1979) 46

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list