Fontenot v. Ryan et al
Petitioner: Derrick Berry Fontenot
Respondent: Charles Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Case Number: 4:2015cv00089
Filed: March 6, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: Eric J Markovich
Presiding Judge: Jennifer G Zipps
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
January 12, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 41 ORDER adopting 40 Report and Recommendation: It is hereby ordered that Magistrate Judge Markovich's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 40 ) is accepted and adopted; Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is DENIED; This case is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Jennifer G Zipps on 1/11/2018. (SIB)
December 19, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 40 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the District Court DENY Petitioner Derrick Berry Fontenot's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (Doc. 1 ). Any party may serve and file written objections within fourteen days afte r being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen days after being served with a copy thereof. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 12/19/2017. (See attached pdf for complete details) (DPS)
September 13, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 32 ORDER denying 29 Petitioner's Motion for Release; denying 30 Motion to Expand Current Motion under Review; granting 31 Motion for Status. The Clerk of Court shall mail Petitioner date stamped copies of Documents 29 and 30 . The Cler k shall also mail Petitioner a copy of the docket list in this case. Petitioner is hereby notified that his § 2254 Petition is currently under review by this Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 9/12/2016. (See Order for details) (DPS)
June 2, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 28 ORDER denying 21 Petitioner's Motion to Amend under Fed.R.Civ.P.15(a) for Violation of Right to Counsel and Violation of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments; denying 27 Petitioner's Motion for Custody or Release of a Prisoner in a Habeas Corpus Proceeding, Pending Review of Decision Rule 23(A) (B3)&(C). Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 6/2/2016. (See Order for details) (DPS)
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: Fontenot v. Ryan et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Derrick Berry Fontenot
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 ]
Respondent: Charles Ryan
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 ]
Respondent: Attorney General of the State of Arizona
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?