Case Name: Sean SILVEIRA; Jack Safford; Patrick Overstreet; David K. Mehl; Steven Focht, Sgt.; David Blalock, Sgt.; Marcus Davis; Vance Boyce; Keneth Dewald, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Bill LOCKYER, Attorney General, State of California; Gray Davis, Governor, State of California, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-05-06
Citations: 328 F.3d 567
Docket Number: No. 01-15098
Parties: Sean SILVEIRA; Jack Safford; Patrick Overstreet; David K. Mehl; Steven Focht, Sgt.; David Blalock, Sgt.; Marcus Davis; Vance Boyce; Keneth Dewald, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Bill LOCKYER, Attorney General, State of California; Gray Davis, Governor, State of California, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: REINHARDT, MAGILL, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 328
Pages: 567–592

Head Matter:
Sean SILVEIRA; Jack Safford; Patrick Overstreet; David K. Mehl; Steven Focht, Sgt.; David Blalock, Sgt.; Marcus Davis; Vance Boyce; Keneth Dewald, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Bill LOCKYER, Attorney General, State of California; Gray Davis, Governor, State of California, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-15098.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Filed May 6, 2003.
Gary W. Gorski, Fair Oaks, CA, Daniel M. Karalash, Robert Lucas, Richards, Karalash, Lucas & Lacy, Sacramento, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Nancy L. Palmieri, San Diego, CA, Tim L. Rieger, Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, David F. De Alba, Attorney General’s Office of the State of California, Sacramento, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
C.D. Michel, Trutanich & Michel LLP, San Pedro, CA, for Amicus.
Before: REINHARDT, MAGILL, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
The Honorable Frank J. Magill, Senior Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
Order; Dissent by Judge PREGERSON; Dissent by Judge KOZINSKI; Dissent by Judge KLEINFELD; Dissent by Judge GOULD.
ORDER
A majority of the panel has voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc.
The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. An active judge requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The matter failed to receive a majority of the votes of the nonre-cused active judges in favor of en banc reconsideration. FED. R. APP. P. 35.
The petition for rehearing en banc is denied.