Byrd v. Lewis
This text of Byrd v. Lewis (Byrd v. Lewis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TIMOTHY LEE BYRD, No. 06-15977 Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. v. CV-02-02013-MCE GAIL LEWIS; ATTORNEY Eastern District GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF of California, CALIFORNIA, Sacramento Respondents-Appellees. ORDER
Filed June 10, 2008
Before: J. Clifford Wallace and Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Circuit Judges, and Jane A. Restani,* Judge.
ORDER
Submission of this case is WITHDRAWN and DEFERRED pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Pulido v. Chrones, 487 F.3d 669 (9th Cir. 2007 (per curiam), cert. granted, 128 S. Ct. 1444 (2008). The Court’s framing of the question presented in Pulido suggests that the opinion will clarify how Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1 (1999), applies to all defective jury instructions.
The opinion filed on December 11, 2007, published at 510 F.3d 1045, is WITHDRAWN. It may not be cited as prece- dent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Cir- cuit until further order of the Court.
*The Honorable Jane A. Restani, Chief Judge, United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation.
6565 PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO
The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2008 Thomson Reuters/West.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Byrd v. Lewis, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/byrd-v-lewis-ca9-2008.