Donald Kenneth Fetterly v. David Paskett, Warden, Idaho State Prisons and Jim Jones, Attorney General of the State of Idaho

15 F.3d 1472
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMarch 8, 1994
Docket90-35627
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 15 F.3d 1472 (Donald Kenneth Fetterly v. David Paskett, Warden, Idaho State Prisons and Jim Jones, Attorney General of the State of Idaho) 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
Donald Kenneth Fetterly v. David Paskett, Warden, Idaho State Prisons and Jim Jones, Attorney General of the State of Idaho, 15 F.3d 1472 (9th Cir. 1994).

Opinions

The panel has voted to deny appellees’ petition for rehearing and to reject the suggestion for rehearing en banc.

The full court was advised of the suggestion for rehearing en banc. An active judge requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The matter faded to receive a majority of the votes of the nonrecused active judges in favor of en bane consideration. Fed.RApp.P. 35. Judges Kozinski, Hall, and Wiggins would grant the suggestion for rehearing en banc.

The petition for rehearing is denied and the suggestion for rehearing en bane is rejected.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 F.3d 1472, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donald-kenneth-fetterly-v-david-paskett-warden-idaho-state-prisons-and-ca9-1994.