United States v. Nichols

784 F.3d 666, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 6148, 2015 WL 1727385
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit·Decided April 15, 2015·No. 14-3041·Published·Cited by 16 cases

Opinions

ORDER

This matter is before the court on the appellant’s Petition for Rehearing En [667]*667Banc. We also have a response from the government. Upon consideration of the implicit request for panel rehearing contained in the petition, the request is denied by a majority of the original panel members.

The en banc petition was also transmitted to all of the judges of the court who are in regular active service. Upon review, a poll was called, and a majority of the active judges voted to deny the en banc suggestion. Consequently, that request is likewise denied. Judges Lucero, Gorsuch, Matheson and Moritz would grant the en banc petition.

Judges Lucero and Gorsuch have written separately in dissent from the denial of the petition.

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

United States v. Nichols, 784 F.3d 666, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 6148, 2015 WL 1727385 (10th Cir. 2015).

784 F.3d 666 (United States v. Nichols) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Pheasant
Ninth Circuit, 2025
Tony Evers v. Howard Marklein
2025 WI 36 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2025)
Allstates Refractory Contractors v. Julie Su
79 F.4th 755 (Sixth Circuit, 2023)
Jere Fabick v. Tony Evers
2021 WI 28 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2021)
Kristi Koschkee v. Carolyn Stanford Taylor
Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2019
United States v. Morgan
255 F. Supp. 3d 221 (District of Columbia, 2017)
United States v. Anthony Ross
848 F.3d 1129 (D.C. Circuit, 2017)
Gutierrez-Brizuela v. Lynch
834 F.3d 1142 (Tenth Circuit, 2016)
Nichols v. United States
578 U.S. 104 (Supreme Court, 2016)
United States v. Scully
108 F. Supp. 3d 59 (E.D. New York, 2015)