Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

United States v. Louis M. Darensbourg

524 F.2d 233

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1975-12-04
Topic
international-arbitration

How later courts describe this case

  • dicta that Aguilar-Spinelli may only apply to the professional informant situation

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed United States v. Louis M. Darensbourg. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
7 opinions
UNITED STATES v. DARENSBOURG,524 F.2d 233(5th Cir. 1975)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. LOUIS M. DARENSBOURG,
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
No. 74-2313.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
December 4, 1975.
Douglas M. Gonzales, U.S. Atty., Robert S. Leake, Asst. U.S. Atty., Baton Rouge, La., for plaintiff-appellant.

Alex Wall, Baton Rouge, La., for defendant-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana; E. Gordon West, Judge.
[1] ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
[2] (Opinion Oct. 10, 1975, 5 Cir., 1975,520 F.2d 985).
Before GODBOLD, Circuit Judge, SKELTON, Associate Judge,fn*and GEE, Circuit Judge.
GEE, Circuit Judge:
[3] In his petition for rehearing, defendant-appellee points out a factual inaccuracy in the preamble to our opinion. The fourth sentence in the opinion is therefore corrected to read as follows:
A search by authority of the warrant produced weapons, though not precisely those named in the warrant, including a sawed-off shotgun (of smaller gauge than that stated) allegedly used in the armed robbery of a drive-in grocery.


[4] In all other respects, the Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Rule35Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is denied.
[5] GODBOLD, Circuit Judge (dissenting):
[6] For the reasons set out in my dissenting opinion, I dissent from the denial of petition for rehearing.Page 441
  1. Of U.S. Court of Claims, sitting by designation. ↩