From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Ellison

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
May 21, 1982
722 F.2d 595 (10th Cir. 1982)

Summary

holding that prosecutorial misconduct is not a ground for action under Rule 29(c)

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Miranda

Opinion

No. 82-1602.

May 21, 1982.

Before SETH, HOLLOWAY, McWILLIAMS, BARRETT, WILLIAM E. DOYLE, McKAY, LOGAN and SEYMOUR, Circuit Judges.


The Court, sitting en banc, having heard oral argument of counsel, orders as follows:

1. The petitioner's emergency application for writ of mandamus and appeal is hereby denied.

2. The petitioner's emergency motion for stay of the district court's order of dismissal of Counts 1 through 15 of the Indictment is denied.

3. The order of the panel entered in the captioned cause on May 17, 1982, 684 F.2d 664, staying all further proceedings before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma in case No. 81-CR-97, United States of America v. Robert B. Sutton, et al., is hereby vacated.

The Court is of the view that mandamus is an inappropriate remedy and that to grant the relief prayed for would violate the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

BARRETT and DOYLE, Circuit Judges, dissent.


Summaries of

United States v. Ellison

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
May 21, 1982
722 F.2d 595 (10th Cir. 1982)

holding that prosecutorial misconduct is not a ground for action under Rule 29(c)

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Miranda
Case details for

United States v. Ellison

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PETITIONER, v. HONORABLE JAMES O. ELLISON…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

Date published: May 21, 1982

Citations

722 F.2d 595 (10th Cir. 1982)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Urena

The proper basis for a Rule 29(a) motion for judgment of acquittal is a claim of insufficient evidence in…

U.S. v. Miranda

United States v. Fozo, 904 F.2d 1166, 1171 (7th Cir. 1990). See United States v. Ellison, 684 F.2d 664, 665…