Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Coleman v. Risley
Coleman v. Risley, 845 F.2d 884 (9th Cir. 1988)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1988-05-12
- Topic
- general
ORDER Upon the vote of a majority of the nonre-cused regular active judges of this court, it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Coleman v. Risley. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 2 opinions
COLEMAN v. RISLEY,845 F.2d 884(9th Cir. 1988)
DEWEY E. COLEMAN, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. HENRY RISLEY, WARDEN, MONTANA
STATE PRISON, AND MICHAEL T. GREELEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF
MONTANA, RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES.
No. 85-4242.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
May 12, 1988.
Before BROWNING, Chief Judge, GOODWIN, WALLACE, HUG, TANG, SCHROEDER, FLETCHER, FARRIS, PREGERSON, ALARCON, POOLE, NELSON, CANBY, NORRIS, REINHARDT, BEEZER, HALL, WIGGINS, BRUNETTI, KOZINSKI,Page 885NOONAN, THOMPSON, O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
[1]ORDER
[2] Upon the vote of a majority of the nonrecused regular active judges of this court, it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3.Page 1513