Korelc v. Ryan et al
Randall Mark Korelc |
Charles Ryan, Attorney General of the State of Arizona and Unknown Stole |
2:2017cv00355 |
February 2, 2017 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Phoenix Division Office |
Pinal |
Michelle H Burns |
John J Tuchi |
General |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 19 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION- IT IS ORDERED overruling Petitioners 15 Objections to the R&R in this matter. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED adopting in whole Judge Burn's 13 R&R. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying and dismissing with pr ejudice the 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying a COA because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Petitioners 18 Application for Certificate of Appealability. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close this matter. Signed by Judge John J Tuchi on 12/6/18. (MSA) |
Filing 13 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - IT IS RECOMMENDED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1 ) be DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be DENIED because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michelle H Burns on 03/07/2018. (KAS) |
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.