Javier Bolden v. Dave Davey
Petitioner: Javier Bolden
Respondent: Warden Dave Davey
Case Number: 2:2016cv05105
Filed: July 12, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Paul L. Abrams
Presiding Judge: George H. Wu
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
November 26, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 22 JUDGMENT by Judge George H. Wu. Pursuant to the order accepting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation 21 , IT IS ADJUDGED that the petition in this matter is denied and dismissed with prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (ch)
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: Javier Bolden v. Dave Davey
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Javier Bolden
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: Warden Dave Davey
Represented By: Michael Robert Johnsen
Represented By: Steven E Mercer
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?