Legal Opinion
United States v. Pedro Jolio Prandy-Binett
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided October 8, 1993No. 91-3296PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
2Per curiam
On Appellee’s Suggestion For Rehearing En Banc
Appellee’s Suggestion For Rehearing En Banc and the Response thereto have been *561circulated to the full Court. The taking of a vote was requested. Thereafter, a majority of the judges of the Court in regular active service did not vote in favor of the suggestion. Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED, by the Court en banc, that the suggestion is denied.
Circuit Judge HARRY T. EDWARDS would grant the suggestion. His dissenting statement, in which Chief Judge MIKVA, Circuit Judge WALD and Circuit Judge SENTELLE join, is attached.
Separat…
Also in this document: Dissent.
3Cases cited5 opinions
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- United States v. SokolowSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United States v. Pedro Jolio Prandy-BinettCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1993
- United States v. Troy Carzell HolderCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1993
- United States v. Prandy-BinnetDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1991
4Cited by4 opinions
- Dawley Harrison v. Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2019
- Psara Energy Ltd. v. Space Shipping Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2019
- Reed v. Commissioner of Social Security AdministrationDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2021
- United States v. Pedro Jolio Prandy-BinettCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1993