Burgess v. Sikes

Fifth Circuit

Burgess v. Sikes

403 F.3d 323, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 4487, 2005 WL 600279

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 9, 2005

DocketNo. 04-30189

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 403 F.3d 323 (Burgess v. Sikes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burgess v. Sikes, 403 F.3d 323, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 4487, 2005 WL 600279 (5th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ON PETITIONS FOR REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion Dec. 6, 2004, 5 Cir., 2004, 392 F.3d 782)

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, WIENER, BARKSDALE, GARZA, DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, STEWART, DENNIS, CLEMENT and PRADO, Circuit Judges.¹

BY THE COURT:

A member of the Court in active service having requested a poll on the petition for rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. [324]*324The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI