Lopez v. Wilson, 01-3875.
| Decision Date | 20 April 2004 |
| Docket Number | No. 01-3875.,01-3875. |
| Citation | 366 F.3d 430 |
| Parties | Fernando LOPEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Julius WILSON, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Robert D. Little, Law Office of Robert Little, Maplewood, NJ, for Petitioner-Appellant.
Douglas R. Cole, Office of the Attorney General of Ohio, Columbus, OH, for Respondent-Appellee.
Before: BOGGS, Chief Judge; MARTIN, BATCHELDER, DAUGHTREY, MOORE, COLE, CLAY, GILMAN, GIBBONS, ROGERS, and SUTTON, Circuit Judges.*
A majority of the Judges of this Court in regular active service qualified to participate have voted for rehearing of this case en banc. Sixth Circuit Rule 35(a) provides as follows:
"The effect of the granting of a hearing en banc shall be to vacate the previous opinion and judgment of this court, to stay the mandate and to restore the case on the docket sheet as a pending appeal."
Accordingly, it is ORDERED, that the previous decision and judgment of this court is vacated, the mandate is stayed and this case is restored to the docket as a pending appeal.
It is further ORDERED that the appellant file a supplemental brief not later than Thursday, May 20, 2004, and the appellee file a supplemental brief not later than Monday, June 21, 2004. The Clerk will schedule this case for oral argument as directed by the court.
* Judge Cook did not participate in this case.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Richey v. Mitchell
...deferential standard of review required by AEDPA, Lopez has since been vacated and en banc review is still pending. See Lopez v. Wilson, 366 F.3d 430 (6th Cir.2004). SILER, Circuit Judge, I respectfully dissent from the majority's conclusions that there was insufficient evidence against Ric......
-
Williams v. Bagley
...state court decisions. Id. at 938. Subsequently, the court voted to vacate Lopez and hear the matter en banc. Lopez v. Wilson, 366 F.3d 430, 2004 WL 934989 (6th Cir. Apr.20, 2004). Because we can resolve this matter without deciding whether Williams had a constitutional right to Rule 26(B) ......
-
Lopez v. Wilson
...of counsel for filing an application to reopen his direct appeal was not contrary to clearly established federal law), vacated, 366 F.3d 430 (2004). Because panels of this court have split over the correct characterization of the rule, we granted en banc review. See Lopez, 355 F.3d 931 (hol......
- Festerman v. Cnty. of Wayne