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
United States of America, Appellant v. Archibald R. Schaffer Iii, Appellee
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT - 234 F.3d 36 (D.C. Cir. 2000)
November 22, 2000
Before: EDWARDS, Chief Judge, WILLIAMS, GINSBURG, SENTELLE, HENDERSON, RANDOLPH, ROGERS, TATEL and GARLAND, Circuit Judges.
Circuit Judges Sentelle, Randolph, and Garland did not participate in this matter.
Prior Report: 214 F.3d 1359
ORDER
PER CURIUM
Upon consideration of appellee's petition for rehearing en banc, the response thereto, and the vote by a majority of the judges of the court in regular active service in favor of the petition, it is
ORDERED that the petition be granted. This case will be reheard by the court sitting en banc. The judgment filed on June 27, 2000 is hereby vacated. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that oral argument before the en banc court will be heard at 10:00 A.M. on Wednesday, April 4, 2001. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall submit thirty copies each of briefs and the appendix in accord with the following schedule:
Appellant's Brief and January 16, 2001 Appendix Appellee's Brief February 16, 2001 Appellant's Reply Brief March 2, 2001
Along with any other issues deemed appropriate, the briefs shall address the following:
(1.) The application of Thompson v. United States, 188 F.2d 652 (D.C.Cir.1951)
(2.) Whether appellee's request for a new trial satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33
(3.) The extent of deference due to the judgment of the trial court in the granting of a new trial.