Legal Opinion
Epperson v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided July 24, 1985No. 81-332PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON REHEARING
GALLAGHER, Associate Judge, Retired:
In its per curiam decision in this case (Epperson v. United States, 471 A.2d 1016 (D.C.1984)), this court held, essentially, that a trial judge should not repeatedly give an “anti-deadlock” instruction to a “hung jury.” Sometime later, the government *1172filed a motion to recall the mandate and to consider its petition for rehearing. Upon the government’s representation that, in its view, the court’s opinion would have harmful effects “on the administration of justice in this jurisdiction,” we recalled the mandate and afforded the parties further…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Allen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- United States v. Cecil RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1977
- United States v. Elliott Kahaner, Antonio Corallo and James Vincent KeoghCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
- United States v. Anthony C. ThomasCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Hunter v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Harris v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- Arthur v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- Carey v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- Blaine v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2011
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.