Romero v. Schriro

Petitioner: Francisco Javier Romero
Respondent: Dora Schriro
Case Number: 2:2008cv00542
Filed: March 19, 2008
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Habeas Corpus (General) Office
County: Maricopa
0 Judge:
Referring Judge: Jacqueline J Marshall (PS)
Presiding Judge: Roslyn O Silver
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
March 18, 2015 74 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 73 ) is ADOPTED and the petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED a Certificate of Appealability is DENIED. Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Signed by Senior Judge Roslyn O Silver on 3/18/2015. (KMG)

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: Romero v. Schriro
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Francisco Javier Romero
Represented By: Michael Philip Denea
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Dora Schriro
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 [ 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?