Richard Cosio v. United States (order)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
District of Columbia
Court of Appeals
Nos. 98-CF-1906 and 02-CO-1453
RICHARD COSIO,
Appellant,
F9642-97
v.
UNITED STATES,
Appellee.
BEFORE: Wagner, Chief Judge; Terry, Schwelb, Farrell, Ruiz, Reid, Glickman, and
Washington, Associate Judges; Ferren, Senior Judge.
ORDER
(Filed February 3, 2005)
On consideration of appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc, and the opposition
thereto; and it appearing that a majority of the judges of this court has voted to grant the
petition for rehearing en banc, it is
ORDERED that appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc is granted, that the
judgment of July 8, 2004, is hereby vacated, and the mandate issued July 30, 2004, is
hereby recalled. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall schedule these matters for argument
before the court sitting en banc as soon as the calendar permits, limited to the issue of
whether appellant was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel under the Sixth
Amendment; and it appearing that the court would benefit from the participation of
amicus curiae counsel in its consideration of these appeals, it is
FURTHER ORDERED that Christopher Landau, Esquire, and Padraic B.
Fennelly, Esquire, of the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis, are hereby designated to
participate in these proceedings as amicus curiae counsel. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the briefs of the parties and amicus curiae counsel
shall be filed no later than March 14, 2005. Each party, and amicus curiae counsel shall
file any reply brief no later than April 4, 2005. Each party, and amicus curiae counsel
shall file ten copies of its briefs. These new briefs, which shall address only the issue of
ineffective assistance by trial counsel, shall be specifically designed for consideration by
and addressed to the en banc court and shall supersede all briefs previously filed in these
appeals. Further, the parties and amicus curiae counsel shall hand-serve the briefs, unless
other arrangements for service are agreed upon by a party or amicus curiae counsel to be
served. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that any requests for extension of time will be looked upon
with disfavor and will be granted only upon a showing of good cause.
PER CURIAM
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.