From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Williamson

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Mar 16, 1995
47 F.3d 1090 (11th Cir. 1995)

Opinion

No. 89-8938. Non-Argument Calendar.

March 16, 1995.

Benjamin S. Waxman, Frederick S. Robbins, Weiner, Robbins, Tunkey Ross, P.A., Miami, FL, for appellant.

Deborah A. Griffin, Asst. U.S. Atty., Mike Solis, Charles Cox, Macon, GA, David S. Kris, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Crim. Div., Appellate Section, Washington, DC, for appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia (No. CR-89-37-MAC (DF)); Duross Fitzpatrick, Judge.

Before TJOFLAT, Chief Judge, HATCHETT and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.


ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES


In its opinion published as Williamson v. United States, 512 U.S. ___, 114 S.Ct. 2431, 129 L.Ed.2d 476 (1994), the United States Supreme Court vacated this court's judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

Further proceedings in this case will involve issues relating to the government's ability or desire to continue this prosecution, issues that can be better resolved in the district court.

Accordingly, this case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion.

REMANDED.


Summaries of

United States v. Williamson

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Mar 16, 1995
47 F.3d 1090 (11th Cir. 1995)
Case details for

United States v. Williamson

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. FREDEL WILLIAMSON, A/K/A…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

Date published: Mar 16, 1995

Citations

47 F.3d 1090 (11th Cir. 1995)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. McVeigh

The Fifth Circuit, in turn, remanded the case to the trial court "for further proceedings consistent with the…

Fisher v. Univ. of Tex. at Austin

The mandate must be read against the backdrop of custom that accords courts of appeal discretion to remand to…