Montanez vs Cate, et al
| Ramiro Montanez |
| Matthew Cate and Ken Clark |
| 2:2009cv01865 |
| July 7, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Kimberly J. Mueller |
| None |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
25
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Charlene H. Sorrentino on 6/22/11 RECOMMENDING that 2 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Ramiro Montanez be denied. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections to F&R due by within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Meuleman, A)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii; Due to the appointment of Recalled Magistrate Judge Charlene H. Sorrentino to the bench of the Eastern District, this action is REASSIGNED from Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman to Magistrate Judge Charlene H. Sorrentino for all further proceedings. The District Judge currently assigned to the case will remain unchanged. (Donati, J)
|
|
Filing
7
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/24/09 ORDERING that this action is stayed; Clerk of the Court is directed to administratively close this case; and petitioner shall inform the court within 10 days of the exhaustion of state court remedies with respect to claims 1-3 in his habeas petition.(Dillon, M)
|
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
