Opinion

Louis Chandler v. Mike Brown

Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Filed
May 9, 2025
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION

Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b)

File Name: 25a0122p.06

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

┐

LOUIS CHANDLER,

│

Petitioner-Appellant, │

> No. 23-1270

│

v. │

│

MIKE BROWN, Warden, │

Respondent-Appellee. │

┘

On Petition for Rehearing En Banc

United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan at Marquette.

No. 2:19-cv-00263—Paul Lewis Maloney, District Judge.

Decided and Filed: May 9, 2025

Before: SUTTON, Chief Judge; MOORE, CLAY, GRIFFIN, KETHLEDGE, WHITE,

STRANCH, THAPAR, BUSH, LARSEN, NALBANDIAN, READLER, MURPHY,

DAVIS, MATHIS, BLOOMEKATZ, and RITZ, Circuit Judges.*

_________________

COUNSEL

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC: Ann M. Sherman, Jared D. Schultz, OFFICE

OF THE MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellee. ON

RESPONSE: Jessica Zimbelman, STATE APPELLATE DEFENDER OFFICE, Lansing,

Michigan, Matthew A. Monahan, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Detroit,

Michigan, for Appellant.

*

Judge White was not eligible to participate in the vote on whether to grant the petition for rehearing en

banc, see 6 Cir. I.O.P. 40(f), but was eligible to participate in deliberations after the Court granted en banc review,

see 6 Cir. I.O.P. 40(g).

No. 23-1270 Chandler v. Brown Page 2

_________________

ORDER

_________________

A majority of the Judges of this Court in regular active service has voted for rehearing en

banc of this case. Sixth Circuit Rule 40(d) provides as follows:

A decision to grant rehearing en banc vacates the previous opinion and judgment

of the court, stays the mandate, and restores the case on the docket as a pending

appeal.

Separately, a majority of the en banc Court has voted to return the case to the original

panel for entry of an amended opinion.

ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that the previous decision and judgment of this Court

are vacated, the mandate is stayed, and this case is restored to the docket as a pending appeal.

It is further ORDERED that the case be referred to the original panel for entry of an

amended opinion that will issue forthwith.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

__________________________________

Kelly L. Stephens, Clerk

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.