Case Name: Christopher A. BURGER, Petitioner-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. Ralph KEMP, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center, Respondent-Appellant, Cross-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1986-07-23
Citations: 796 F.2d 1313
Docket Number: No. 81-7419
Parties: Christopher A. BURGER, Petitioner-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. Ralph KEMP, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center, Respondent-Appellant, Cross-Appellee.
Judges: Before VANCE and JOHNSON, Circuit Judges, and ALLGOOD , Senior District Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 796
Pages: 1313–1313

Head Matter:
Christopher A. BURGER, Petitioner-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. Ralph KEMP, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center, Respondent-Appellant, Cross-Appellee.
No. 81-7419.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
July 23, 1986.
William B. Hill, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Atlanta, Ga., for respondent-appellant, cross-appellee.
Joe Nursey, Andrea I. Young, Millard Farmer, Pamela L.J. Arangno, Atlanta, Ga., for petitioner-appellee, cross-appellant.
Before VANCE and JOHNSON, Circuit Judges, and ALLGOOD , Senior District Judge.
Honorable Clarence W. Allgood, Senior U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Alabama, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
(Opinion March 13, 1986, 11 Cir., 785 F.2d 890).
PER CURIAM:
The panel opinion of March 13, 1986 should not be interpreted as requiring a defendant to place intent explicitly in issue before he can prevail on a challenge to burden shifting instructions on criminal intent. The panel majority simply noted that evidence of intent is more likely to be overwhelming where the defendant has not attempted to counter the state's evidence on criminal intent.
With the foregoing clarification of the panel opinion the petition for panel rehearing is DENIED and no member of this panel nor other judge in regular active service on the court having requested that the court be polled on rehearing en banc, Fed.R.App.P. 35, 11th Cir. Rule 26, the suggestion for rehearing en banc is DENIED.
Judge JOHNSON adheres to the viev/s previously expressed in his dissent from the panel opinion.