Oyenik v. Schaff et al
Ronald Edward Oyenik |
Thomas Schaff and Arizona Attorney General, State of |
2:2007cv00984 |
May 14, 2007 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Phoenix Division Office |
Pima |
Hector C Estrada (PS) |
Mary H Murguia |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 17 ORDER - denying and dismissing with prejudice Petitioner's Petition for Writof Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Mary H Murguia on 9/22/10. (KMG) |
Filing 3 ORDER that the Clerk of Court must serve a copy of the petition 1 and this order on the respondent and the Attorney General of the State of AZ by certified mail pursuant to Rule 4, Governing Section 2254 Cases; respondents must answer the petition within 40 days of service; petitioner may file a reply within 30 days from the date of service of the answer; petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis filed with the petition is denied; this matter is referred to Magistrate Jduge Hector C. Estrada pursuant Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for further proceedings and a report and recommendation. Signed by Judge Mary H Murguia on 5/22/2007. (LAD) |
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 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.