Case Resources
Search this Case
in
Google Scholar
on the Web
Google
Web Search
MSN
Web Search
Yahoo!
Web Search
in the News
Google
News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google
Blog Search
Technorati
Blog Search
in other Databases
Google
Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Alpha Otis O'daniel Stephens, Petitioner-appellant, v. Walter Zant, Superintendent, Respondent-appellee
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. - 648 F.2d 446
June 18, 1981
James C. Bonner, Jr., Athens, Ga., Richard Erwin Shapiro, New Orleans, La. for petitioner-appellant.
John C. Boger, Joel Berger, Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit, III, Deborah Fins, New York City, Anthony G. Amsterdam, Stanford, Cal., amicus curiae, for NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.
Harrison Kohler, Atlanta, Ga., for respondent-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia.
Before INGRAHAM, RONEY and THOMAS A. CLARK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Upon consideration of the petition for rehearing filed by the appellee, we delete the following sentence that appears in 631 F.2d 397 on page 406, column 2, line 10:
The presence of the unconstitutionally vague circumstance also made it possible for the jury to consider several prior convictions of petitioner which otherwise would not have been before it.
The two sentences immediately following the above sentence at page 406 of the opinion are modified to read as follows:
The instruction on the invalid circumstance may have unduly directed the jury's attention to his prior convictions. It cannot be determined with the degree of certainty required in capital cases that the instruction did not make a critical difference in the jury's decision to impose the death penalty.
The petition for rehearing is DENIED. No member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 16) the petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED.