Rodrigo Ruben Escarcega v. Paul D. Brazelton
Petitioner: Rodrigo Ruben Escarcega
Respondent: Paul D. Brazelton
Case Number: 2:2014cv01749
Filed: March 10, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Paul L. Abrams
Presiding Judge: Percy Anderson
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
June 6, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 130 JUDGMENT by Judge Percy Anderson, Related to: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1 . Pursuant to the Order accepting the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation 129 , IT IS ADJUDGED that the Petition in this matter is dismissed with prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (gr)
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 California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Rodrigo Ruben Escarcega v. Paul D. Brazelton
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Paul D. Brazelton
Represented By: David A Wildman
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: Rodrigo Ruben Escarcega
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?