Pacheco #112692 v. Ryan et al
| Isidro Pacheco |
| Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona |
| 2:2015cv02264 |
| November 9, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| Pinal |
| David G Campbell |
| James F Metcalf |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| 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
40
ORDER - Petitioner's Supplemental Notice of Motion for Issuance of Writ due to noncompliance (Doc. 36 ) and Motion to Strike State's Response (Doc. 39 ) are denied. Signed by Senior Judge David G Campbell on 6/21/19. (DXD)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER - Petitioner's 32 Motion for Issuance of Writ Due to Non-Compliance of this Court's Order is denied. See document for complete details. Signed by Senior Judge David G Campbell on 10/9/2018. (ATD)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER accepting the 19 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf. The 1 Petition for writ of habeas corpus is conditionally granted. Petitioner is ordered released unless within 90 days of this order, Petitioner is permit ted to file a new of-right Rule 32 PCR proceeding, including the filing of a brief by counsel and an independent review of the record by the trial court consistent with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 12/22/2016. (ATD)
|
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.
