Dupnik

Mitchell v. Dupnik

Good Law
75 F.3d 517·96 Daily Journal DAR 883·1995 WL 790834·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 1047·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 545
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 26, 1996Nos. 93-16517, 93-16955 and 93-17019California5,639 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Canby, J.

ORDER

The motion of Shabazz to file a late response to the County defendants’ petition for rehearing is GRANTED. Shabazz’s response is ordered filed.

Shabazz’s motion to strike the affidavit appended to the County defendants’ petition for rehearing is GRANTED. The affidavit is stricken.

The opinion of this court filed on September 28, 1995, and reported at 67 F.3d 216 is withdrawn, and the attached opinion is substituted therefor.

With the filing of this opinion, the panel has unanimously voted to deny the petition of the County defendants for rehearing and to *520 reject their suggestion for rehearing en banc. The petition for rehearing of the County defendants is denied. The County defendants’ suggestion for rehearing en banc has been circulated to the full court and no member of the court has called for a vote to rehear the case en banc. The County defendants suggestion for rehearing en banc is rejected.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.

OPINION

Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik and several of his deputies appeal a series of district court judgments and orders in favor of prisoner Mustafa' B. Shabazz, formerly known as Anthony…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.