AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. ANTONIO SANTIA-MANRIQUEZ AND ALFREDO SANTIAGO-RODRIGUEZ, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM:

The Government has pointed out that United States v. McInnis, 601 F.2d 1319, 1323 (5th Cir. 1979), reached a different conclusion than our original opinion in this case, 603 F.2d 575, 577 n. 1 (5th Cir. 1979) (per curiam), on whether the thirty-day period during which the Government must file a notice of appeal under Fed.R.App.P. 4(b) begins as of the date of an oral order or as of the date of the written order.

Accordingly, we delete the last two sentences of the first paragraph of the opinion and footnote one. In their place, the following sentences should be inserted at the end of the first paragraph: "On October 4, 1978, the district court handed down a written order embodying its July 28 verbal order, so both appeals are timely under Fed.R.App.P. 4(b). United States v. McInnis, 601 F.2d 1319, 1323 (5th Cir. 1979). We find the district court's ruling to be correct and affirm."

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

UNITED STATES v. SANTIA-MANRIQUEZ
(Jan 15, 1980)