Mihaylo et al v. Russell-Jenkins et al
Emily Noelle Mihaylo and James Joseph Knochel |
Shane Russell-Jenkins, Attorney General of the State of Arizona, Amy Fackrell and John C Morris |
3:2018cv08004 |
January 11, 2018 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Prescott Division Office |
Yavapai |
John Z Boyle (PS) |
G Murray Snow |
Prisoner: Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 27, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 16 NOTICE/Letter by James Joseph Knochel. (4 pages) (EJA) |
Filing 15 AFFIDAVIT re: #14 Notice by Petitioner James Joseph Knochel. (5 pages) (EJA) |
Filing 14 NOTICE re: #8 Motion to Dismiss Case by Emily Noelle Mihaylo. (2 pages) (REK) |
Filing 13 ORDER denying #12 Mr. Knochel's "Motion to Seal Case." This case must remain closed. Signed by Chief Judge G Murray Snow on 12/10/18. (EJA) |
Filing 12 MOTION to Seal Case by James Joseph Knochel. (SLQ)(2 pages). |
Filing 11 CLERK'S JUDGMENT - IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pursuant to the Court's Order filed February 7, 2018, judgment of dismissal is entered. Petitioners to take nothing and this action is hereby dismissed without prejudice. (LAD) |
Filing 10 ORDER - (1) The Petition for Habeas Corpus (Doc. #1 ) and this case are dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court must enter judgment accordingly and close this case. (2) The "Motion for Ex-Parte Evidentiary Hearing in Support of 'Next Friend,' and for a Temporary Restraining Order" (Doc. #2 ), Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. #3 ) and Motion to Dismiss Case (Doc. #8 ) are denied as moot. (3) 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). (See document for further details). Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 2/7/18. (LAD) |
Filing 9 RESPONSE to #8 MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by James Joseph Knochel. (LAD) (6 pages) |
Filing 8 MOTION to Dismiss Case by Emily Noelle Mihaylo. (LAD) (1 page, styled as a letter to the Court) |
Filing 7 NOTICE TO SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANT re informational documents attached: (1) Notice to Self-Represented Litigant, (2) Federal Court Self-Service Clinic Flyer, (3) Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2, and (4) Notice and Request re Electronic Noticing. (SLQ) |
Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT: (SLQ) |
Filing 5 REQUEST BY NON-PRISONER PRO SE PARTY FOR ELECTRONIC NOTICING filed by James Joseph Knochel. Pro se parties must promptly notify the Clerks Office, in writing, if there is a change in designated e-mail address or mailing address. (SLQ) |
Filing 4 BRIEF ("Trial Brief of Petitioners: Exhaustion of State Remedies") by Petitioners James Joseph Knochel, Emily Noelle Mihaylo. (SLQ) (14 pages). |
Filing 3 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by James Joseph Knochel, Emily Noelle Mihaylo. (SLQ) (6 pages). |
Filing 2 MOTION for Ex-Parte Evidentiary Hearing, MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by James Joseph Knochel, Emily Noelle Mihaylo. (SLQ) (3 pages). |
Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254). Filing fee received: $ 5.00, receipt number PHX192843 filed by Emily Noelle Mihaylo, James Joseph Knochel.(SLQ) (42 pages). |
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 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.