567 F.3d 1142 - Pulido v. Chrones — 567 F.3d 1142

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently September 2024

7 federal appellate ·

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1J. Bradley O’Connell, First District Appellate Project, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner-Appellee/Petitioner-Appellant.

¶2Michael Robert Pulido, Corcoran, CA, pro se.

¶3Jeremy E. Friedlander, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent-AppellanVRespondent-Appellee.

¶4Before: ALFRED T. GOODWIN, DIARMUID F. O’SCANNLAIN, and SIDNEY R. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

¶5ORDER

¶6Petitioner-Appellant’s Petition for Reconsideration of Dispositive Order, filed with this court on March 31, 2009 is GRANTED. The Order remanding the case, filed March 20, 2009 is VACATED.

¶7Petitioner-Appellant’s Motion to file Supplemental Brief Following Supreme Court Remand, filed March 10, 2009 is GRANTED and Petitioner-Appellant’s Supplemental Brief is ordered FILED.

¶8Respondent-Appellant is directed to file a responsive brief to Petitioner-Appellee’s Supplemental Brief to address the application of the harmless error standard of Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 113 S.Ct. 1710, 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993). Respondent-Appellant shall respond within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order, and Respondent-Appellant shall provide this court with ten (10) copies.