United States v. Samuel Sanchez and Francisco Armendaris
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Samuel SANCHEZ and Francisco Armendaris, Defendants-Appellees
Opinion
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC Before FAY and VANCE, Circuit Judges, and ALLGOOD * , District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
The Petition for Rehearing, insofar as the same is addressed to the panel, 1
is DENIED. A review of the record and the briefs, along with statements made by counsel during oral argument, convinces us that it would have been absolutely futile for the appellees to have raised a elaim of duress or coercion in the administrative proceedings.
1
. Rule 26(F) of our Local Rules provides that, “A suggestion for rehearing en banc will also be treated as a petition for rehearing before the original panel.”
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- William Neal Moore v. Charles Balkcom, Warden, Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General
- Thomas C. Pollgreen v. Raymond A. Morris, District Director of the United States Immigration & Naturalization Service
- United States of America, United States of America v. Manuel Blanco Garcia
- Lyden v. Howerton
- Pollgreen v. Morris
- United States v. Francisco Armendaris
Most recent
- United States of America, United States of America v. Manuel Blanco Garcia
- United States v. Francisco Armendaris
- Dewey L. Lyden, M/v "Born Again" v. Joe D. Howerton, Director of United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, Edward F. O'connor, Harvey W. Carnes and Robert N
- Lyden v. Howerton
- Thomas C. Pollgreen v. Raymond A. Morris, District Director of the United States Immigration & Naturalization Service
- Pollgreen v. Morris
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.