United States v. Wright

• Citation: 668 F.3d 776
• Decision Date: 25 January 2012
• Docket Number: No. 09–31215.,09–31215.
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Michael WRIGHT, Defendant–Appellant.
• Court: United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)

668 F.3d 776

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellee,
v.
Michael WRIGHT, Defendant–Appellant.

No. 09–31215.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 25, 2012.

Brian Marshall Klebba, Diane Hollenshead Copes (argued), James R. Mann, Asst. U.S. Attys., New Orleans, LA, Michael A. Rotker, Crim. Div., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff–Appellee.

Robin Elise Schulberg (argued), Roma Ajubita Kent, Asst. Fed. Pub. Defenders, Fed. Pub. Defender's Office, New Orleans, LA, for Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana; Kurt D. Engelhardt, Judge.ON PETITIONS FOR REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC(Opinion April 20, 2011, 5th Cir., 2011, 639 F.3d 679)Before JONES, Chief Judge, and KING, JOLLY, DAVIS, SMITH, GARZA, BENAVIDES, STEWART, DENNIS, CLEMENT, PRADO, OWEN, ELROD, SOUTHWICK, HAYNES and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.¹PER CURIAM:

A member of the court having requested a poll on the petition for rehearing en banc, and a majority of the circuit judges in regular active service and not disqualified having voted in favor,

IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.

--------

Notes:

^1. Judge Stephen A. Higginson is recused and did not participate in this decision.