Larry Grant Lonchar v. Albert G. Thomas, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center

Eleventh Circuit

Larry Grant Lonchar v. Albert G. Thomas, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center

67 F.3d 900, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 32331, 1995 WL 559501

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedSeptember 8, 1995

Docket95-8821

StatusPublished

This text of 67 F.3d 900 (Larry Grant Lonchar v. Albert G. Thomas, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Larry Grant Lonchar v. Albert G. Thomas, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center, 67 F.3d 900, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 32331, 1995 WL 559501 (11th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

*901 ON SUGGESTION OF REHEARING EN BANC

Before TJOFLAT, Chief Judge, COX and DUBINA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

On June 29, 1995, Larry Lonchar filed a suggestion of rehearing en banc with the clerk. Before this court acted on that suggestion Lonchar filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court. On June 29, while the suggestion of rehearing en bane was outstanding, the Supreme Court granted certiorari. Under these circumstances this court is without authority to fully consider the petitioner’s suggestion of rehearing en banc. Jurisdiction in the matter is now in the Supreme Court. Accordingly, we will not act on the outstanding suggestion of rehearing en banc absent remand from the Supreme Court, returning jurisdiction to us to consider petitioner’s suggestion of rehearing en banc.

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

*901 ON SUGGESTION OF REHEARING EN BANC

Before TJOFLAT, Chief Judge, COX and DUBINA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

On June 29, 1995, Larry Lonchar filed a suggestion of rehearing en banc with the clerk. Before this court acted on that suggestion Lonchar filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court. On June 29, while the suggestion of rehearing en bane was outstanding, the Supreme Court granted certiorari. Under these circumstances this court is without authority to fully consider the petitioner’s suggestion of rehearing en banc. Jurisdiction in the matter is now in the Supreme Court. Accordingly, we will not act on the outstanding suggestion of rehearing en banc absent remand from the Supreme Court, returning jurisdiction to us to consider petitioner’s suggestion of rehearing en banc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 F.3d 900, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 32331, 1995 WL 559501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/larry-grant-lonchar-v-albert-g-thomas-warden-georgia-diagnostic-and-ca11-1995.