Dale Michael Hanson v. Mike Mahoney, Warden

357 F.3d 880, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 1255
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 28, 2004
Docket18-72211
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 357 F.3d 880 (Dale Michael Hanson v. Mike Mahoney, Warden) 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.

Bluebook
Dale Michael Hanson v. Mike Mahoney, Warden, 357 F.3d 880, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 1255 (9th Cir. 2004).

Opinions

ORDER

The opinion filed on July 18, 2003 is withdrawn. A majority of the panel has voted to reconsider its decision in this case. The panel is presented with a significant claim of conflict between petitioner and his counsel on appeal. Petitioner has informed the court that he no longer wishes to be represented by counsel appointed by the district court. Petitioner is hereby ordered to inform the court by February 13, 2004, whether he wishes to proceed pro se or whether he requests appointment of counsel. The clerk shall enter an order setting a schedule for re-briefing of this appeal. If Petitioner chooses to be represented by new appointed counsel, the clerk shall enter an order designating and appointing counsel.

The Clerk shall serve this order on appellant individually, at Dale Hanson, #A037112, 700 Conley Lake Road, Deer Lodge, Montana, 89722.

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

Related

Carl Manora v. Patrick R. Donahoe
439 F. App'x 352 (Fifth Circuit, 2011)
Dale Michael Hanson v. Mike Mahoney, Warden
357 F.3d 880 (Ninth Circuit, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
357 F.3d 880, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 1255, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dale-michael-hanson-v-mike-mahoney-warden-ca9-2004.