Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

412 F.2d 860

Docket No. 26933

United States v. Meadows

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Aug. 1, 1969.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1969-08-01

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently November 1970

7 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Murphy v. Houma Well Service · Blake v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1969-08-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Summary Calendar.

¶2Roy Mussilinio Meadows, pro se.

¶3Donald H. Fraser, U. S. Atty., Bruce B. Greene, Asst. U. S. Atty., Savannah, Ga., for appellee.

¶4Before BELL, AINSWORTH and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.

¶5PER CURIAM:

¶6Pursuant to new Rule 18 of the Rules of this court, we have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have directed the clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. *861Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804, Part I.

¶7The judgment of the district court is reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial in light of Blake v. United States, 5th Cir. 1969, 407 F.2d 908. The Blake definition of insanity was given only prospective and not restrospective application by this Court, except that the new standard was made applicable to all cases then on appeal which involved the defense of insanity. This case falls within that category.

¶8Reversed and remanded.

/412/f2d/860 · .json · Public domain