United States v. Benally

Tenth Circuit

United States v. Benally

560 F.3d 1151, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 6170, 2009 WL 738393

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

DecidedMarch 23, 2009

Docket08-4009

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 560 F.3d 1151 (United States v. Benally) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Benally, 560 F.3d 1151, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 6170, 2009 WL 738393 (10th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinions

ORDER

This matter is before the court on Kerry Dean Benally’s petition for rehearing en banc. The original panel considered the petition. Any implicit request for panel rehearing is denied.

The en banc request was transmitted to all of the judges of the court who are in regular active service. A poll was called and a majority of the active judges voted to deny rehearing en banc. Chief Judge Henry, Judge Briscoe, Judge Lucero, and Judge Murphy would grant the petition.

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

ORDER

This matter is before the court on Kerry Dean Benally’s petition for rehearing en banc. The original panel considered the petition. Any implicit request for panel rehearing is denied.

The en banc request was transmitted to all of the judges of the court who are in regular active service. A poll was called and a majority of the active judges voted to deny rehearing en banc. Chief Judge Henry, Judge Briscoe, Judge Lucero, and Judge Murphy would grant the petition.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

560 F.3d 1151, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 6170, 2009 WL 738393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-benally-ca10-2009.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack