Steven Anthony Gurule Jr. v. Warden
Petitioner: Steven Anthony Gurule, Jr
Respondent: Warden
Case Number: 5:2017cv00920
Filed: August 9, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Office: Eastern Division - Riverside Office
Presiding Judge: Jesus G. Bernal
Presiding Judge: Sheri Pym
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
August 9, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNTIED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge Jesus G. Bernal for Report and Recommendation (Issued) 7 . IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Judgment will be entered denying the First Amended Petition and dismissing this action with prejudice. (iva)
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: Steven Anthony Gurule Jr. v. Warden
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Steven Anthony Gurule, Jr
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
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?