United States v. William Joseph Kirk
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Joseph KIRK, Defendant-Appellant
Opinion
ON SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC (Opinion November 7, 1995, 5 Cir., 1995, 70 F.3d 791 )
Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and KING, GARWOOD, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, DUHÉ, WIENER, BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, STEWART, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:
A member of the court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestion for rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc, IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(upholding 18 U.S.C. § 922(o))
Cited by 13 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- United States v. Raymond Rybar, Jr.
- United States v. Brad Eugene Branch, Kevin Whitecliff, Jaime Castillo, Renos Lenny Avraam, Paul Fatta and Graeme Leonard Craddock
- United States v. John W. Kenney
- United States v. Nathan Wall (95-5007) and Donald Wall (95-5008)
- Navegar, Inc. v. United States
- United States v. Branch
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.