MARTIN CLEMENT MULLEN-COFEE, PETITIONER,

v.

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, RESPONDENT

Citator

Cited By (84 total)

• Combs v. Plantation Patterns, 106 F.3d 1519 (11th Cir. 1997)
  …s action. Id. at 1564-65. As we have recognized before, “no one is perfect, least of all federal appellate judges, and from our mistakes and oversights spring inconsistent decisions which we must deal with as best we can.” United States v. Hogan, 986 F. 2d 1364, 1369 (11th Cir.1993). The Walker decision is a mistake. Not only is Walker inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s clear instruction in Hicks, but it is also inconsistent with the holdings of our Hairston, Batey, Howard, and Cooper-Houston decision…
• United States v. Steele, 147 F.3d 1316 (11th Cir. 1998)
  …th Cir.1997) (“The law of this circuit is ‘emphatic’ that only the Supreme Court or this court sitting en banc can judicially overrule a prior panel decision.”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1529, 140 L.Ed.2d 680 (1998); United States v. Hogan, 986 F. 2d 1364, 1369 (11th Cir.1993) (“[I]t is the firmly established rule of this Circuit that each succeeding panel is bound by the holding of the first panel to address an issue of law, unless and until that holding is overruled en banc, or by the Supreme Court…
• Tompkins v. Moore, 193 F.3d 1327 (11th Cir. 1999)
  …firmly established rule of this Circuit that each succeeding panel is bound by the holding of the first panel to address an issue of law, unless and until that holding is overruled en banc, or by the Supreme Court.”) (quoting United States v. Hogan, 986 F. 2d 1364, 1369 (11th Cir.1993)); United States v. Dailey, 24 F. 3d 1323, 1327 (11th Cir.1994)(“When there is no method for reconciling an intracircuit conflict of authority, the earliest panel opinion resolving the issue in question binds this circuit until…