Case Name: Rudolph YOUNG, Petitioner-Appellee, v. James CONWAY, Respondent-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-04-23
Citations: 715 F.3d 79
Docket Number: No. 11-830-pr
Parties: Rudolph YOUNG, Petitioner-Appellee, v. James CONWAY, Respondent-Appellant.
Judges: BARRINGTON D. PARKER, Circuit Judge, joined by PETER W. HALL, Circuit Judge, concurs by opinion in the denial of rehearing in banc.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 715
Pages: 79–102

Head Matter:
Rudolph YOUNG, Petitioner-Appellee, v. James CONWAY, Respondent-Appellant.
No. 11-830-pr.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
April 23, 2013.
John H. Blume, Cornell Death Penalty Project, Cornell Law School, Ithaca, NY; Brian Shiffrin, Easton Thompson Kasper-ek Shiffrin, LLP, Rochester, NY, for Petitioner-Appellee.
Geoffrey Kaeuper, Assistant District Attorney, for Sandra Doorley, District Attorney of Monroe County, Rochester, NY, for Respondenb-Appellant.
James L. Broehin, Jennifer H. Wu, Cassius K. Sims, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY; Barry C. Scheck, David Loftis, Karen Ne-wirth, Innocence Project, Inc., New York, NY, for the Innocence Project as Amicus Curiae.
BARRINGTON D. PARKER, Circuit Judge, joined by PETER W. HALL, Circuit Judge, concurs by opinion in the denial of rehearing in banc.
REENA RAGGI, Circuit Judge, joined by JOSÉ A. CABRANES and DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judges, dissents by opinion from the denial of rehearing in banc.
JOSÉ A. CABRANES, Circuit Judge, joined by REENA RAGGI and DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judges, dissents by opinion from the denial of rehearing in banc.

Opinion:
AMENDED ORDER
Following disposition of this appeal on October 16, 2012, Respondent-Appellant James Conway filed a petition for rehearing in banc. An active judge of the Court requested a poll on whether to rehear the case in banc. A poll having been conducted and there being no majority favoring in banc review, rehearing in banc is hereby DENIED.
. Richard C. Wesley, Circuit Judge, was re-cused from consideration of the matter.