Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hollis CLARK, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1980-07-31
Citations: 622 F.2d 917
Docket Number: No. 79-5102
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hollis CLARK, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 622
Pages: 917–917

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hollis CLARK, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 79-5102.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 31, 1980.
Thomas C. Bianco, Atlanta, Ga., for defendant-appellant.
Craig A. Gillen, Asst. U.S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for plain tiff-appellee.
Before COLEMAN, Chief Judge, and BROWN, AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, CHARLES CLARK, RONEY, GEE, TJO-FLAT, HILL, FAY, RUBIN, VANCE, KRAVITCH, FRANK M. JOHNSON, Jr., GARZA, HENDERSON, REAVLEY, POL-ITZ, HATCHETT, ANDERSON, RANDALL, TATE, SAM D. JOHNSON and THOMAS A. CLARK, Circuit Judges.
Judge Jerre S. Williams did not participate in this decision.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The order granting a rehearing en banc, 608 F.2d 238, is vacated as having been improvidently granted on the record before us, and the panel opinion, 598 F.2d 994, is reinstated.
GEE, Circuit Judge, with whom BROWN, CHARLES CLARK, TJOFLAT, FAY, REAVLEY, POLITZ, ANDERSON, RANDALL, TATE, SAM D. JOHNSON, and THOMAS A. CLARK, Circuit Judges, join, specially concurring.
I concur in the court's order because no proffer was made of evidence tending to show advances in the state of polygraph art since the seminal opinion in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir. 1923), upon which our authorities are based, or the competence of polygraphic operators. Had one been made, in my view these authorities would properly be subject to reconsideration.