United States v. Nichols

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
Tenth Circuit
Byron White United States Courthouse
1823 Stout Street
Denver, Colorado 80294
(303) 844-3157
Patrick J. Fisher, Jr. Elisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk Chief Deputy Clerk
November 23, 1998
TO: ALL RECIPIENTS OF THE ORDER AND JUDGMENT
RE: 98-1246, United States v. Nichols
Filed on November 18, 1998
The order and judgment filed on November 18, 1998, contains a typographical
error. On page two, in the final paragraph, the third sentence should appear as
follows:
Relying on our opinion in number 98-1247, we now affirm the district
court’s decision with respect to this appeal.
A copy of the corrected order and judgment is attached for your convenience.
Sincerely,
Patrick Fisher, Clerk of Court
By: Keith Nelson
Deputy Clerk
encl.
F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
NOV 18 1998
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
PATRICK FISHER
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. No. 98-1246
(D.C. No. 96-CR-68-M)
TERRY LYNN NICHOLS, (D. Colo.)
Defendant-Appellant.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
PER CURIAM .
After examining the preliminary record and materials on file, this panel has
determined unanimously that oral argument is unnecessary in this matter. See
Fed. R. App. P. 34(f) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered
submitted without oral argument.
Defendant Terry Lynn Nichols appeals from the district court’s June 24,
1998 order rescinding certain restrictions which prohibited the government from
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
cooperating fully with state authorities investigating the bombing of the Alfred P.
Murrah federal building on April 19, 1995. The issue which Mr. Nichols raises
on appeal is the exact same one addressed in appeal number 98-1247, United
States v. McVeigh , 157 F.3d 809 (10th Cir. 1998). In that published decision, we
held the district court did not abuse its discretion in lifting the prior prohibition
on cooperation with state authorities. Id. at 815.
Mr. Nichols joined that parallel proceeding as an intervenor on August 17,
1998. He filed briefs as well as a petition for rehearing. Relying on our opinion
in number 98-1247, we now affirm the district court’s decision with respect to
this appeal. The stay entered in this matter via our order of July 7, 1998, is
dissolved. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
Entered for the Court
Per Curiam
-2-