Ronnie Randall v. Michael Evans
Petitioner: Ronnie Randall
Respondent: Michael Evans
Case Number: 2:2009cv01815
Filed: March 17, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Office: Western Division - Los Angeles Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Fischer
Presiding Judge: Zarefsky
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
October 28, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 73 JUDGMENT by Judge Dale S. Fischer: The Petition is denied and the action is dismissed with prejudice. Re: Order Accepting Findings and Recommendations 72 (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (ib)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ronnie Randall v. Michael Evans
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Ronnie Randall
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Michael Evans
Represented By: Tannaz Kouhpainezhad
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?