Legal Opinion

Johnson v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided September 8, 1994No. 94-CO-509PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

2Per curiam

On consideration of appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc, the opposition thereto, *1125appellee’s letter, and appellant’s statement regarding current detention status; and it appearing that no judge of this court has called for a vote on the petition for rehearing en banc, it is

ORDERED that the petition for rehearing en banc is denied.

Statement of Associate Judge FARRELL, with whom Chief Judge WAGNER and Associate Judges FERREN, TERRY, STEADMAN, SCHWELB, KING and SULLIVAN join, in voting to deny rehearing en banc.

Appellant contends that for years this court has been violating D.C.Code §…

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Michael Tann v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API