Legal Opinion
Dearcey Stewart v. Matthew Cate
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 1, 2014No. 10-55985PublishedCited by 64 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order; Opinion by Judge ZIPPS; Dissent by Judge BERZON.
ZIPPS, District Judge:
ORDER
The opinion and dissent filed on November 1, 2013, and appearing at 734 F.3d 995, are amended. The superseding amended opinion and dissent will be filed concurrently with this order.
With these amendments, Judge Ikuta voted to deny the appellant’s petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, and Judge Zipps so recommended. Judge Berzon voted to grant both petitions. 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…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Schlup v. DeloSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Houston v. LackSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- McQuiggin v. PerkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- House v. BellSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Carey v. SaffoldSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by64 opinions
- Scott Jones v. Jeri TaylorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- United States v. J. RevesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Julius Robinson v. G. LewisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Thomas Milam v. Kelly HarringtonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- (HC) Austin v. CovelloDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.