From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carty v. Nelson

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 17, 2005
431 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir. 2005)

Summary

changing "the San Diego County District Attorney contends" to "the State contends"

Summary of this case from Seeboth v. Mayberg

Opinion

No. 03-56766.

Argued and Submitted May 3, 2005.

Filed October 17, 2005. Amended December 15, 2005.

Matthew D. Brown, CJA, San Francisco, CA (argued); Christopher R.J. Pace, Cooley Goodward LLP, San Diego, CA (briefed), for the petitioner-appellant.

Bradley A. Weinreb, Deputy Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for the respondents-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California; Irma E. Gonzalez, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-01-00721-IEG/JFS.

Before PREGERSON, FISHER, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.


ORDER

At slip op. 14213, change "the San Diego County District Attorney contends" to "the State contends."

With this amendment, the panel has voted to deny the Appellant's petition for panel rehearing and for rehearing en banc, and the panel voted to deny the Appellee's petition for rehearing en banc. The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed.R.App.P. 35. The petitions filed by both parties for panel rehearing and for rehearing en banc are DENIED.


Summaries of

Carty v. Nelson

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 17, 2005
431 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir. 2005)

changing "the San Diego County District Attorney contends" to "the State contends"

Summary of this case from Seeboth v. Mayberg

changing "the San Diego County District Attorney contends" to "the State contends"

Summary of this case from Milligan v. Ahlin
Case details for

Carty v. Nelson

Case Details

Full title:Jimmy D. CARTY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Craig NELSON, Warden; Bill…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 17, 2005

Citations

431 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir. 2005)

Citing Cases

Sokolsky v. Rostron

In the context of SVP legislation, the Court has also recognized that involuntary commitment statutes are…

Simmons v. California

Habeas corpus is the exclusive remedy for a state prisoner who challenges the fact or duration of confinement…