Opinion
DA 22-0272
01-10-2023
ORDER
Representing himself, Appellant Rick Miller (Miller) has filed a Petition for Rehearing of this Court's Memorandum Opinion issued on December 6,2022. Respondents have filed a response and object to Miller's request.
Under M. R. App. P. 20, this Court seldom grants petitions for rehearing. The Rule makes clear that this Court will entertain a petition for rehearing on very limited grounds. Specifically, this Court will consider a petition for rehearing only if the opinion "overlooked some fact material to the decision," if the opinion "overlooked some question presented by counsel that would have proven decisive to the case," or if the "decision conflicts with a statute or controlling decision not addressed" by this Court. M. R. App. P. 20(a)(i)-(iii).
Having fully considered Appellant's petition, the Court concludes that rehearing is not warranted under M. R. App. P. 20. The Court did not overlook material facts or issues raised by the parties or fail to address a controlling statute or decision that conflicts with the Memorandum Opinion issued in this matter. Further, to the extent Miller raises a constitutional due process claim in this Petition based on tribal licensure, that claim was not raised or presented in the District Court or on appeal. All other constitutional issues were properly determined by this Court.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the petition for rehearing is DENIED.
The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this Order to all parties and counsel of record.