# Louis Chandler v. Mike Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · May 9, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11048340

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** May 9, 2025
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11048340

## Opinion text

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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11048340. Public record. Not legal advice.