You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Jeffrey Timothy Landrigan, A.K.A. Billy Patrick Wayne Hill v. Terry L. Stewart, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections Dora B. Schriro, Director, Director of Arizona, Department of Corrections

Citations: 397 F.3d 1235; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 2387Docket: 00-99011

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; February 13, 2005; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves Jeffrey Timothy Landrigan, also known as Billy Patrick Wayne Hill, as the petitioner-appellant against Terry L. Stewart and Dora B. Schriro, directors of the Arizona Department of Corrections, as respondents-appellees. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ordered that the case be reheard en banc, following a majority vote by the nonrecused active judges of the court. The previous opinion issued by a three-judge panel is not to be cited as precedent, except to the extent that it may be adopted by the en banc court. Judge Silverman was recused from this case.

Legal Issues Addressed

Judicial Recusal

Application: Judge Silverman did not participate in the decision to rehear the case en banc due to recusal, highlighting the importance of impartiality in judicial proceedings.

Reasoning: Judge Silverman was recused from this case.

Precedential Value of Panel Opinions

Application: The opinion issued by the three-judge panel in the Ninth Circuit cannot be cited as precedent unless it is adopted by the en banc court.

Reasoning: The previous opinion issued by a three-judge panel is not to be cited as precedent, except to the extent that it may be adopted by the en banc court.

Rehearing En Banc

Application: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decided to rehear the case en banc after a majority vote by the nonrecused active judges, indicating the importance or complexity of the case.

Reasoning: The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ordered that the case be reheard en banc, following a majority vote by the nonrecused active judges of the court.