Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca9-14-99005/USCOURTS-ca9-14-99005-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Kevin Chappell
Appellee
Richard Dean Clark
Appellant

Document Text:

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RICHARD DEAN CLARK,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden,

Respondent-Appellee.

No. 14-99005

D.C. No.

3:97-cv-20618-WHA

ORDER

Filed January 31, 2020

Before: Consuelo M. Callahan, Sandra S. Ikuta,

and John B. Owens, Circuit Judges.

Order

Case: 14-99005, 01/31/2020, ID: 11580363, DktEntry: 133, Page 1 of 2
2 CLARK V. CHAPPELL

ORDER

The opinion in this case, published at 936 F.3d 944 (9th 

Cir. 2019) is hereby amended as follows: 936 F.3d at 971, 

delete “and infects the jury as a whole” so that the sentence 

reads “Taking the ‘surrounding circumstances’ into 

consideration, when the juror’s improper communication 

with a non-juror interferes with the juror’s role as a juror, it 

raises a credible risk of affecting the outcome.”

With this amendment the panel has voted to deny the 

petition for panel rehearing and to deny the petition for 

rehearing en banc. The full court has been advised of the 

petition for rehearing en banc and no judge has requested a 

vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. 

P. 35.

The petition for panel rehearing and the petition for 

rehearing en banc are DENIED. No further petition for 

rehearing may be filed.

Case: 14-99005, 01/31/2020, ID: 11580363, DktEntry: 133, Page 2 of 2