Case Name: UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Terrell Jamar HOUSTON Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-06-12
Citations: 691 F. App'x 751
Docket Number: No. 16-4340
Parties: UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Terrell Jamar HOUSTON Defendant-Appellant
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 691
Pages: 751–752

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Terrell Jamar HOUSTON Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-4340
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
FILED: June 12, 2017
Anthony Joseph Enright, Assistant U. S. Attorney, Jill Westmoreland Rose, U. S. Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, Charlotte, NC, Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant U. S. Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, Asheville, NC, for Plaintiff-Appellee
John Parke Davis, Ann Loraine Hester, Federal Defender, Ross Hall Richardson, Acting Federal Public Defender, Federal Defenders of Western North Carolina, Inc., Charlotte, NC, Joshua B. Carpenter, Federal Defenders of Western North Carolina, Inc., Asheville, NC, for Defendant-Appellant

Opinion:
ORDER
The petition for rehearing en banc was circulated to the full court. No judge requested a poll under Fed. R. App. P. 35. The court denies the petition for rehearing en banc.
Statement of Senior Circuit Judge Davis Respecting Denial of En Banc Rehearing
The Court's denial of the petition for rehearing en banc should not give rise to a conclusion that the issues presented are unimportant or undeserving of timely consideration by the Supreme Court. Indeed, the recent filing of a petition for certiorari in a similar case arising in the Third Circuit, see United States v. Byrd, 679 Fed. Appx. 146, 2017 WL 541405 (3d Cir. 2017), pet. for cert. filed, No. 16-1371 (May 11, 2017), reflects that the issues are recqrring and worthy of plenary consideration.