Fifth Circuit Court Cases - Case Law and Opinions from the 5th Circuit Federal Court - Court of Appeals

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions - 5th Circuit
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE

This opinion or court case is from the Fifth Circuit Court or Appeals. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
For the Fifth Circuit
No. 93-7678
JAMES COOPER, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
VERSUS
W.B. "Billy" NOBLE, Sheriff of Madison
County, Et Al.,
Defendants,
JESSIE HOPKINS, Sheriff of Madison
County, ROBERT J. DOWDLE, MARCUS SHARPE,
DAVID H. RICHARDSON, KARL M. BANKS & J.L.
MCCULLOUGH, Members of the Madison County
Board of Supervisors,
Defendants-Appellants.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
(December 15, 1994)
Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judge:
We supplement our prior opinion, see Cooper v. Noble, 33 F.3d
540 (5th Cir. 1994), as follows:
The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994

("the Act"), P.L. 103-322, 90 Stat. 1827, effective September 13,
1994, provides for periodic reopening "at the behest of a
defendant" of court orders or consent decrees seeking to remedy
prison or jail crowding that violates the Eighth Amendment. Id.
§ 20409(a) (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 3626(c)). The Act applies to
all outstanding court orders on the date of its enactment. Id. §
20409(b).
No issue pertaining to the Act was brought before us; the
defendants did not, pursuant to the Act, request a reopening; and,
finally, the District Court proceedings reviewed in this appeal
were conducted prior to September 13, 1994. Accordingly, the
provisions of the Act are not applicable to our determination of
the instant appeal.
2