Case ID: f3d_725/html/0680-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "POSNER, Circuit Judge. ROVNER, Circuit Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bernard HAWKINS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 11-1245.
    United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
    July 31, 2013.
    Julius L. Loeser, Attorney, James R. Thompson, Jr., Attorney, Thomas G. Weber, Attorney, Sean G. Wieber (argued), Attorney, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner-Appellant.
    Gary Bell, Attorney, David E. Hollar (argued), Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, Hammond, IN, for Respondenh-Appellee.
    Before EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, and POSNER, KANNE, ROVNER, WOOD, WILLIAMS, SYKES, TINDER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.
    
    
      
       Circuit Judge Flaum took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
    
   POSNER, Circuit Judge.

The petition to rehear this case (decided February 7, 2013, in an opinion reported at 706 F.3d 820) en banc is denied. Judges Rovner, Wood, Williams, and Hamilton voted to grant rehearing en banc.

See also the supplemental panel opinion, issued today, which denies panel rehearing, together with a dissenting opinion by Judge Rovner.

ROVNER, Circuit Judge,

with whom WOOD, WILLIAMS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges,

join, dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc. I dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc for the same reasons set forth in my dissent from the denial of rehearing by the panel. I hereby incorporate by reference that dissent as a statement of the reasons why I believe the court should rehear this case en banc.