Court Opinion

ID: 9465998
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 01:02:23.56954+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:39:29.259156
License: Public Domain

*1226On Petition for Rehearing
ORDER
Respondent-appellant's motion for rehearing having come on to be considered and of the judges of this Court who are in regular active service less than a majority having favored ordering consideration en banc, the motion has been referred to the panel which heard the appeal. Because the Supreme Court in effect broadened the scope of federal habeas corpus review in Jackson v. Virginia, -U.S. -, 99 S.Ct. 2781, (1979), we see no need to reconsider our decision in Speigner v. Jago, 603 F.2d 1208 (6th Cir., June 13, 1979). Obviously, the grant of habeas corpus relief under the narrow “no evidence” standard of Thompson v. Louisville, 362 U.S. 199, 80 S.Ct. 624, 4 L.Ed.2d 654 (1960), is not effected by the establishment of the broader standard of Jackson. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the petition for rehearing be and it hereby is denied. Judge Weick adheres to his dissent for the reasons stated therein. Judge Weick is of the opinion that the inferences drawn from the record by the jury were permissible and the rulings thereon by the Ohio courts were not irrational.