Watts v. Singletary, 87 F.3d 1282

Watts v. Singletary

87 F.3d 1282

11th Cir.

1996

Check Treatment

CARL EUGENE WATTS, Petitioner-Appellee, versus HARRY K. SINGLETARY, Respondent-Appellant.

No. 95-4403

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

December 19, 1996

Opinion July 18, 1996, 11th Cir., 87 F.3d 1282

D.C. Docket No. 94-6258-CIV-UUB; [PUBLISH]

Before HATCHETT, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, KRAVITCH, ANDERSON, EDMONDSON, COX, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK, CARNES and BARKETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The Court having been polled at the request of one of the members of the Court and a majority of the Circuit Judges who are in regular active service not having voted in favor of it (Rule 35, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Eleventh Circuit Rule 35-5), the Suggestion of Rehearing En Banc is DENIED.

BARKETT, Circuit Judge, dissenting:

I respectfully dissent from the order of the majority of the court in denying the petition of appellee Carl Watts for en banc rehearing. This case presents important issues which, for reasons stated in Judge Carnes‘s dissent, were erroneously decided.