From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U. S. v. Taroya-Mendoza

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 17, 2007
No. 05-10259 (9th Cir. Aug. 17, 2007)

Opinion

No. 05-10259.

August 17, 2007.

D.C. No. CR-04-20046-JW Northern District of California, San Jose.

Before: B. FLETCHER, SILER, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

The Honorable Eugene E. Siler, Jr., Senior United States Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.


ORDER AMENDING MEMORANDUM DISPOSITION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC.


The memorandum disposition filed on May 16, 2007, is amended as follows: Replace the sentence, appearing at page 2, lines 10-15, "This argument, too, has been precluded by the en banc opinion, which held that `[r]einstatement of a prior removal order — regardless of the process afforded in the underlying order — does not offend due process because reinstatement of a prior order does not change the alien's rights or remedies.' Morales-Izquierdo, 477 F.3d at 704." with "This argument also fails because appellee has not demonstrated that any purported error by his attorney affected the outcome of the proceedings below."

With that amendment the panel has voted to deny panel rehearing. Judge Hawkins has voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc, and Judges B. Fletcher and Siler so recommend. The petition for rehearing en banc has been circulated to the full court. No request for rehearing has been made. The petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc are denied. No further petitions will be entertained.


Summaries of

U. S. v. Taroya-Mendoza

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 17, 2007
No. 05-10259 (9th Cir. Aug. 17, 2007)
Case details for

U. S. v. Taroya-Mendoza

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SERGIO TAROYA-MENDOZA…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 17, 2007

Citations

No. 05-10259 (9th Cir. Aug. 17, 2007)