TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Davis v. United States

Milton Lee DAVIS, Jr. v. UNITED STATES

Davis v. United States, 518 A.2d 712 (D.C. 1986)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
District of Columbia Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 18, 1986
Docket
No. 85-121
Judges
Belson, Ferren, MacK, Nebeker, Newman, Pryor, Rogers, Steadman, Terry
Citations
518 A.2d 7121986 D.C. App. LEXIS 500

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

ORDER PER CURIAM.

On consideration of appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc, and the response thereto, and the motion of Public Defender Service for leave to file brief as amicus curiae in support of petition for rehearing en banc, and the lodged brief; and it appearing that the majority of the judges of this court has voted to grant the petition for rehearing en banc, it is

ORDERED that the motion of Public Defender Service for leave to file brief as amicus curiae is granted and the Clerk is directed to file the lodged brief of amicus curiae. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc is granted and that the opinion and judgment of May 20, 1986, are hereby vacated. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall schedule this case for argument before the court sitting en banc as soon as the business of the court permits. Counsel are hereby directed to provide ten copies of the briefs heretofore filed to the Clerk on or before December 29, 1986.

Associate Judges TERRY and STEAD-MAN have recused from participating in this case.

How later courts describe this case

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

1989: 219892026peak 1989 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Davis v. United States564 A.2d 31 (D.C. 1989)
  2. Jones v. United States566 A.2d 44 (D.C. 1989)

Most recent

  1. Jones v. United States566 A.2d 44 (D.C. 1989)
  2. Davis v. United States564 A.2d 31 (D.C. 1989)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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