Carlos Ramirez v. David B. Long
Petitioner: Carlos Ramirez
Respondent: David B. Long
Case Number: 2:2014cv02008
Filed: March 17, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: James V. Selna
Presiding Judge: Patrick J. Walsh
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
RSS 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
October 11, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 67 JUDGMENT by Judge James V. Selna related to: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, 66 . IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that the Second Amended Petition is DENIED and this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (iva)
March 1, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 50 ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge James V. Selna for Report and Recommendation (Issued) 48 . IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: (1) Respondents Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED with respect to Claim Two; (2) Respondents Motion to Dismiss is DENIED with respect to Claims One and Three; and (3) Respondent shall file an Answer to Claims One and Three within thirty days of the date of this Order. (iva)
November 3, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 27 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER by Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato: Re Respondent's Request for Clarification of theCourt's October 29, 2014 Order (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS) 26 Request for Reconsideration (dts)
October 29, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 25 AMENDED MINUTE Order Granting Request for Stay AndAbeyance Pursuant to Kelly v. Small by Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato: 1. Petitioner's notice of voluntary dismissal is hereby accepted by the court and GRANTED. Accordingly, the second prong of Claim One which alleges the evidence was insufficient to prove Petitioner committed the shooting that formed the basis for his underlying conviction is dismissed without prejudice. 2. Petitioners request for a Kelly stay is GRANTED. This action -- now containing only the exhausted grounds -- is hereby stayed pending exhaustion of petitioners state court remedies on other grounds and/or further order of this Court. 4. Beginning on January 27, 2015, and continuing every 90 days thereafter, pet itioner shall file a Status Report with the Court, addressing the status of petitioner's state habeas petition, including the date on which it was filed, the court in which it is pending, the case number, and any recent activity. Respondent m ay file a status report within fourteen days following petitioners filings, if respondent wishes to advise the Court of any developments not reported by petitioner. 5. Within 30 days after any decision by the California Supreme Court on petitioners habeas petition, petitioner shall advise this Court of the decision. Further, should petitioner abandon his efforts to exhaust his state court remedies on other grounds, he shall immediately advise this Court. 6. Petitioner is cautioned that if he f ails to act diligently in seeking to exhaust his state court remedies or fails to act within the time frames discussed above, the Court may vacate the stay and prohibit petitioner from raising any new claims in this action.granting 24 Request for Reconsideration (dts)
October 28, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 23 ORDER Granting Request for Stay And Abeyance Pursuantto Rhines v. Weber by Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato, 1. Petitioner's notice of voluntary dismissal is hereby accepted by the court and GRANTED. Accordingly, the second prong of Claim One which alleges the evidence was insufficient to prove Petitioner committed the shooting that formed the basis for his underlying conviction is dismissed without 2. Petitioners request for a Kelly stay is GRANTED. This action -- now containing only th e exhausted grounds -- is hereby stayed pending exhaustion of petitioners state court remedies on other grounds and/or further order of this Court. 4. Beginning on January 27, 2015, and continuing every 90 days thereafter, petitioner shall file a Sta tus Report with the Court, addressing the status of petitioner's state habeas petition, including the date on which it was filed, the court in which it is pending, the case number, and any recent activity. Respondent may file a status report w ithin fourteen days following petitioners filings, if respondent wishes to advise the Court of any developments not reported by petitioner. 5. Within 30 days after any decision by the California Supreme Court on petitioners habeas petition, petitione r shall advise this Court of the decision. Further, should petitioner abandon his efforts to exhaust his state court remedies on other grounds, he shall immediately advise this Court. 6. Petitioner is cautioned that if he fails to act diligently in seeking to exhaust his state court remedies or fails to act within the time frames discussed above, the Court may vacate the stay and prohibit petitioner from raising any new claims in this action. (dts)
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: Carlos Ramirez v. David B. Long
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: David B. Long
Represented By: Seth Patrick McCutcheon
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: Carlos Ramirez
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?