Carl Eugene Watts v. Harry K. Singletary

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit December 19, 1996

Carl Eugene Watts v. Harry K. Singletary, 102 F.3d 1119 (11th Cir. 1996)

1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 33143; 1996 WL 730439

Hatchett, Tjoflat, Kravitch, Anderson, Edmondson, Cox, Birch, Dubina, Black, Carnes, Barkett

Opinion of the Court

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

Before HATCHETT, Chief Judge, and TJOFLAT, KRAVITCH, ANDERSON, EDMONDSON, COX, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK, CARNES and BARKETT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

The Court having been polled at the request of one of the members of the Court and a majority of the Circuit Judges who are in regular active service not having voted in favor of it (Rule 35, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Eleventh Circuit Rule 35-5), the Suggestion of Rehearing En Banc is DENIED.

Dissenting Opinion

*1120BARKETT, Circuit Judge,

dissenting:

I respectfully dissent from the order of the majority of the court in denying the petition of appellee Carl Watts for en banc rehearing. This case presents important issues which, for reasons stated in Judge Carnes’s dissent, were erroneously decided.

Reference

Full Case Name: Carl Eugene WATTS, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Harry K. SINGLETARY, Respondent-Appellant
Cited By: 1 case
Status: Published