Muhammad v. Schriro et al

Case Number: 2:2006cv01036
Filed: April 12, 2006
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
Referring Judge: Lawrence O Anderson
Presiding Judge: Stephen M McNamee
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28:2254 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
November 8, 2011 130 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 124 : IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING AND DISMISSING Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be GRANTED because Petitioner has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. (See document for further details). Signed by Judge Stephen M McNamee on 11/7/11. (LAD)
July 7, 2011 124 Opinion or Order of the Court REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus: IT IS RECOMMENDED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, doc.1, be DENIED. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be GRANTED because Petitioner has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. (See document for further details). Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence O Anderson on 7/7/11. (LAD)

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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Muhammad v. Schriro et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ 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?