Lionel E. Gentry v. Ernie Roe, Warden Attorney General of the State of California
Opinions
Opinion by Judge FARRIS; Dissent by Judge SILVERMAN
ORDER
The opinion filed August 8, 2002, and amended August 30, 2002, is further amended as reflected in the attached revised opinion. The dissent filed August 8, 2002, is also amended as reflected in the attached revised dissent.
With these amendments, Judges Hug and Farris voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing; Judge Silverman voted to grant the petition. Judge Silverman voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc and Judges Hug and Farris so recommended.
The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. A judge requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The matter failed to receive a majority of the votes of the nonrecused active judges in favor of en banc consideration. Fed. R.App. P. 35.
The petition for panel rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
320 F.3d 891 (Lionel E. Gentry v. Ernie Roe, Warden Attorney General of the State of California) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.