Paddock v. USA

Paddock v. USA

Petitioner:	Royce Paul Paddock, I
Respondent:	USA
Case Number:	3:2013cv08032
Filed:	February 8, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office:	Prescott Division Office
County:	Coconino
Presiding Judge:	Mark E Aspey (PS)
Presiding Judge:	G Murray Snow
Nature of Suit:	Prisoner: Vacate Sentence - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
December 2, 2013	Filing 17 ORDER Magistrate Judge Aspey's R&R (Doc. 16 ) is accepted. Petitioner's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (Doc. 1 ) is denied and dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. Pursuant to Rule 11( a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Cases, in the event Movant 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 12/2/2013. (KMG)
March 27, 2013	Filing 3 ORDER that the Clerk of Court must serve a copy of the 1 § 2255 Motion and this Order on the United States Attorney for the District of Arizona. The parties and the Clerk of Court must file all documents related to the § 2255 Motion in the civil case. The matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Mark E. Aspey for further proceedings and a report and recommendation. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 3/27/2013. (LFIG)

Date Filed

Document Text

December 2, 2013

Filing 17 ORDER Magistrate Judge Aspey's R&R (Doc. 16 ) is accepted. Petitioner's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (Doc. 1 ) is denied and dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. Pursuant to Rule 11( a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Cases, in the event Movant 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 12/2/2013. (KMG)

March 27, 2013

Filing 3 ORDER that the Clerk of Court must serve a copy of the 1 § 2255 Motion and this Order on the United States Attorney for the District of Arizona. The parties and the Clerk of Court must file all documents related to the § 2255 Motion in the civil case. The matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Mark E. Aspey for further proceedings and a report and recommendation. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 3/27/2013. (LFIG)

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: Paddock v. USA
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: USA
Represented By:	Sharon K Sexton
Represented By:	Dyanne Christine Greer
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	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Royce Paul Paddock, I
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	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| 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?