Desantiago v. Ryan et al
| Ramon Cardoza Desantiago |
| Charles Ryan and Arizona Attorney General, State of |
| 2:2009cv01268 |
| June 11, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| Pinal |
| Jay R Irwin (PS) |
| Neil V Wake |
| None |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| 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
14
ORDER AND CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS accepting 13 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. The Clerk shall enter judgment denying and dismissing 1 petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 with prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate this action. Having considered the issuance of a Certificate of Appealability from the order denying Petitioner's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, the Court FINDS: Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are Denied. Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 10/27/10. (LSP)
|
|
Filing
13
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254) filed by Ramon Cardoza Desantiago be dismissed with prejudice and that a Certificate of Appealability be denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jay R Irwin on 10/7/10. (LSP)
|
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.
