Circuit's fully active appeals judges en banc, after a rehearing sought by Kamehameha Schools. On January 10, 2006, in an en banc decision, Judge Bybee wrote the opinion for the majority in the case of Smith v. Salish Kootenai College. In that case, James Smith sought to have a case heard in federal court which he had previously brought in a tribal court. When he disagreed with the tribal court's decision, he claimed that it had had no jurisdiction in the first place. In an 8-3 decision, the Court upheld the tribal court's jurisdiction over the subject matter, thereby strengthening tribal courts' rights to claim jurisdiction. On September 11, 2006, Bybee wrote the majority opinion in Kesser v. Cambra, granting habeas corpus to the defendant by a 6–5 vote. Richard Kesser had been convicted of hiring a hitman to kill his former wife and was sentenced to life without parole. During Kesser's trial in 1995, the prosecutor had eliminated three Native American jurors and one Asian juror for racial reasons. Effectively granting Kesser a new trial, this decision laid out the current Batson analysis in the Ninth Circuit. On November 7, 2006, Bybee wrote on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel in the case of Lankford v. Arave. Mark Lankford had been convicted of murder and sentenced to death nearly two decades earlier. The Ninth Circuit granted habeas corpus based on ineffective assistance of counsel and faulty jury instructions, and noted that there was support for Lankford's theory that his brother committed the murders in question. On August 21, 2008, in U.S. v. Craighead, the Ninth Circuit held that the defendant's rights had been violated when he was interrogated in his own home without first being read his Miranda rights. In that case, numerous law enforcement officers had arrived at the defendant's home because he was suspected of having downloaded child pornography. In a decision written by Bybee, the Court held that the defendant's interrogation had been custodial and therefore violated his Fifth Amendment rights. On November 7, 2008 (but amended twice in January 2009), the Ninth Circuit tackled the issue of due process rights of individuals who were mistakenly placed on the California Child Abuse Central Index (CCACI), a registry for accused and known child abusers. In Los Angeles County v. Humphries, Craig and Wendy Humphries fought to have their names removed from the CCACI after the courts had