United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Cynthia M. Stoner, Defendant-Appellee., 139 F.3d 1343 (10th Cir. 1998)

Federal Circuits

Linked as:

Text


Before SEYMOUR, Chief Judge and PORFILIO, ANDERSON, TACHA, BALDOCK, BRORBY, EBEL, KELLY, HENRY, BRISCOE, LUCERO and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

We granted rehearing en banc in this case on the question:

For statute of limitations purposes, must an indictment charging a conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 allege at least one specific overt act occurring within the limitations period established by 18 U.S.C. 3282?

Because we are evenly divided, we affirm the district court's judgment on this issue. That portion of the panel opinion which addressed this issue and which is found at II.B. of the opinion, United States v. Stoner, 98 F.3d 527, 531-538 (10th Cir.1996), is without precedent. Ohio ex rel. Eaton v. Price, 364 U.S. 263, 263-264, 80 S.Ct. 1463, 1463-1464, 4 L.Ed.2d 1708 (1960); United States v. Rivera, 874 F.2d 754 (10th Cir.1989). The panel opinion is otherwise undisturbed.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Sponsored links




ver las páginas en versión mobile | web

ver las páginas en versión mobile | web

© Copyright 2012, vLex. All Rights Reserved.

Contents in vLex United States

Explore vLex

For Professionals

For Partners

Company