Hairston v. Paskett
| James H Hairston |
| Dave Paskett |
| 1:2000cv00303 |
| June 2, 2000 |
| US District Court for the District of Idaho |
| Boise - Southern Office |
| Ada - Southern |
| B. Lynn Winmill |
| Death Penalty - Habeas Corpus |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution |
| 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
239
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that Hairston must seek authorization from the United States Court of Appeals to bring the ineffective assistance of trial counsel mitigation claim in a second petition before it can be adjudicated in th is court. This case will not be re-opened, nor will the certificate of appealability be expanded to include the issue decided in this Order. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (st)
|
|
Filing
202
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 196 Motion to Alter Judgment. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by cjm)
|
|
Filing
192
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 154 Motion to Expand the Record ; denying 155 Motion for Evidentiary Hearing; denying and dismissing with prejudice 99 Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. The Court issues a Certificate of Ap pealability over the Court's resolution of Claims 1,2,5,21 (limited to the mitigation sub-claim), and 26. The Court shall not certify any other issue or claim for appeal. Upon the filing of a timely notice of appeal in this case, the Clerk of Court shall forward the necessary paperwork to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by cjm)
|
|
Filing
131
MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER: Respondent's answer to Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 99 due 45 days from today's date; Petitioner's Brief due 60 days after receipt of Answer; Petitioner's Motions for evidentia ry development due w/i 60 days of receipt of Answer; Respondent's responses due 60 days thereafter and petitioner's reply 21 days from response. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by sb)
|
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 Idaho 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
| Search for this case: Hairston v. Paskett | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: James H Hairston | |
| Represented By: | Bruce D Livingston(Designation Public Defender or Community Defender Appointment) |
| 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: Dave Paskett | |
| Represented By: | L LaMont Anderson |
| 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.
