Case ID: us-app-dc_344/html/0114-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

234 F.3d 36
    UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Archibald R. SCHAFFER, III, Appellee.
    No. 99-3153.
    United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
    Nov. 22, 2000.
    BEFORE: EDWARDS, Chief Judge; WILLIAMS, GINSBURG, SENTELLE, HENDERSON, RANDOLPH, ROGERS, TATEL and GARLAND, Circuit Judges.
    Circuit Judges SENTELLE, RANDOLPH and GARLAND did not participate in this matter.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of appellee’s petition for rehearing en banc, the response thereto, and the vote by a majority of the judges of the court in regular active service in favor of the.petition, it is

ORDERED that the petition be granted. This case will be reheard by the court sitting en banc. The judgment filed on June 27, 2000 is hereby vacated. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that oral argument before .the en banc court will be heard at 10:00 A.M. on Wednesday, April 4,2001. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall submit thirty copies each of briefs and the appendix in accord with the following schedule:

Appellant’s Brief and January 16, 2001 Appendix
Appellee’s Brief February 16, 2001
Appellant’s Reply Brief March 2, 2001

Along with any other issues deemed appropriate, the briefs shall address the following:

(1.) The application of Thompson v. United States, 188 F.2d 652 (D.C.Cir.1951)
(2.) Whether appellee’s request for a new trial satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33
(3.) The extent of deference due to the judgment of the trial court in the granting of a new trial