UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
VERA LEE PEACOCK, HOYLE LAMONT PEACOCK, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court granted rehearing and affirmed the district court's forfeiture order, vacating its prior ruling on the scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1963(a).
The court initially reversed a forfeiture order based on its interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 1963(a) in light of United States v. Martino. Subsequently,…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
PER CURIAM:
IT IS ORDERED that the government’s petition for rehearing is GRANTED.
Part V of our opinion dealt with the forfeiture of insurance proceeds acquired by the appellants. Bound at the time by the decision in United States v. Martino, 648 F. 2d 367 (5th Cir. 1981), we held that 18 U.S.C. § 1963(a) did not authorize the forfeiture of the profits of a RICO offense and reversed the district court’s forfeiture order. 654 F. 2d 339 at 351-52.
After our opinion issued, the Former Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted rehearing en banc as to the portion of Martino that dealt with forfeiture. The court held that § 1963(a) does encompass “forfeiture of the income or proceeds of racketeering activity.” United States v. Martino, 681 F. 2d 952, 961 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc).
Accordingly, upon our reconsideration, so much of Part V of our opinion as dealt with the scope of section 1963(a) is vacated. The district court’s forfeiture order is affirmed for the reasons stated in the Fifth Circuit’s en banc opinion in Martino. In all other respects, the panel adheres to the opinion previously issued, and appellants’ petition for rehearing is DENIED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (20 total)
-
Higerd v. State, 54 So. 3d 513 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
-
Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170 (U.S. 1984)
-
United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (U.S. 1983)
Previewing 3 of 20 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Martino, 648 F.2d 367 (5th Cir. 1981)
- United States v. Hoyle Lamont Peacock, 654 F.2d 339 (5th Cir. 1981)
- United States v. Martino, 681 F.2d 952 (5th Cir. 1982)