Robbins v. Ryan et al
||Robin Lynn Robbins
||Thomas C Horne and Charles L Ryan
||March 26, 2012
||US District Court for the District of Arizona
||Prescott Division Office
||James F Metcalf
||G Murray Snow
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28 U.S.C. § 2254
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|March 5, 2013
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 22 . Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is dismissed with prejudice as to Ground Two (Insufficiency of Evidence) and denied as to the remainder of the Petition. The Clerk of Co urt shall terminate this action. Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 3/5/13. (LAD)
|March 28, 2012
ORDER - Petitioner's request that Respondent be required to provide a complete copy of the state record (included in the Memorandum attached to Doc. 1) is denied as premature. The Clerk of Court must serve a copy of the Petition (Doc. 1) and thi s Order on the Respondent and the Attorney General of the State of Arizona by certified mail pursuant to Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf pursuant to Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for further proceedings and a report and recommendation. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 3/28/12. (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
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?