Salazar v. Cate
Petitioner: Jose Escobedo Salazar
Respondent: Matthew Cate
Case Number: 2:2009cv03585
Filed: December 28, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Tuolumne
Presiding Judge: Gregory G. Hollows
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
December 29, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 34 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Charlene H. Sorrentino on 12/28/2011 RECOMMENDING that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be denied 1 ; and a certificate of appealability not issued. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton; Objections due within 21 days after being served with these F & R's.(Reader, L)
July 12, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 7/11/11: Petitioner's reply to the answer, if any, shall be filed and served within twenty-eight days after service of this order. (Kaminski, H)
March 22, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 3/21/11 ORDERING that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS filed 2/1/11 23 are ADOPTED in full; Respondent's MOTION to DISMISS 14 is DENIED; Respondents are directed to file an answer to the petition within twenty-eight days of the filed date of this order. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
February 1, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 23 ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 01/31/11 ORDERING the clerk of court is to substitute Frank X. Chavez, Warden as respondent in the docket of this case. Also, RECOMMENDING that respondent's motion to dismiss 14 be denied. Respondent be directed to file an answer to the petition within 28 days of adoption of these findings and recommendations should that occur. MOTION to DISMISS 14 referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Objections due within 14 days.(Plummer, M)
September 3, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 9/2/2010 ORDERING that the 15 order to show cause is DISCHARGED; ptnr has 28 days to respond to the 14 motion to dismiss; and the clerk to send ptnr a copy of 14 motion to dismiss. (Yin, K)
August 4, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 8/3/2010 ORDERING ptnr to show cause, w/in 14 days, why respondent's 5/27/10 motion to dismiss should not be granted. (Yin, K)
May 7, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 05/06/1 ORDERING that respondent's 12 Motion for Extension of Time to File a response is GRANTED; respondent's response is due on 05/31/10. (Benson, A.)
March 2, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 3/2/10 DIRECTING RESPONDENT to File a Response to Petition within 60 days. Clerk to serve a copy of this order, a copy of the Petition and the Order re Consent on the Attorney General. Petitioner's 6 Motion to Proceed IFP is GRANTED. (cc Michael Farrell)(Dillon, M)
January 20, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/20/10 ORDERING that petitioner shall submit, within 28 days from the date of this order, an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee; Petit ioner's application for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed with leave to file an amended petition within 28 days from the date of this order. Petitioner shall also file, within 28 days from the date of this order, a short brief demonstrating exh austion, or explaining his choice to dismiss the unexhausted claims and proceed on the exhausted claims only, or to seek a stay to exhaust the unexhausted claims. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner copies of the in forma pauperis and habeas corpus application forms used by this district; Petitioners requests for discovery, an evidentiary hearing, and appointment of counsel are premature, and therefore denied at this time without prejudice.(Dillon, M)
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Salazar v. Cate
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Jose Escobedo Salazar
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: Matthew Cate
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?