Darrell Rushing v. Joe M Arpaio et al
| Darrell Rushing |
| Los Angeles CRCR gov, Agent Guctereze and Joe M Arpaio |
| 2:2012cv07859 |
| September 12, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| John A Kronstadt |
| Alicia G. Rosenberg |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
16
JUDGMENT by Judge John A Kronstadt, Related to: R&R - Accepting Report and Recommendations 15 . Pursuant to the Order Accepting Findings and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge, IT IS ADJUDGED that the Petition in this matter is denied and dismissed without prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (mp)
|
|
Filing
7
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg. On September 12, 2012, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. For the reasons discussed below, it appears that Petitioner has failed to exhaust his state remedies.The court , therefore, orders Petitioner to show cause, on or before October 29, 2012, why the petition should not be dismissed without prejudice based on failure to exhaust state remedies. Petitioner is also advised that if he fails to timely respond to this order to show cause, the petition is subject to dismissal without prejudice based on failure to exhaust state remedies. (See Order for details.) (mp)
|
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 California Central 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.
