Aurelio Martin Sepulveda v. James Hill
| Aurelio Martin Sepulveda |
| James Hill |
| 5:2023cv02195 |
| October 23, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Jean P Rosenbluth |
| Christina A Snyder |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 27, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 Petitioner's OPPOSITION to Respondent's Motion to Dismiss #11 ; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of filed by Petitioner Aurelio Martin Sepulveda. (es) |
| Filing 11 Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss; Memorandum of Points and Authorities filed by Respondent James Hill. (Gibson, Andrew) Modified on 11/27/2023 (es). |
| Filing 10 Text Only Entry (In Chambers) The Order Requiring Response to Petition issued by the Court on November 1, 2023, shall now apply to the First Amended Petition Petitioner filed on November 14, 2023. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (bem) TEXT ONLY ENTRY |
| Filing 9 FIRST AMENDED PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS; MEMORANDUM AND AUTHORITIES; AND DECLARATION IN SUPPORT against Respondent James Hill amending Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) #1 ., filed by Petitioner Aurelio Martin Sepulveda (Attachments: #1 Part 1 to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, #2 Part 2 to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, #3 Part 3 to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus). (et) |
| Filing 8 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Andrew M Gibson counsel for Respondent James Hill. Adding Andrew M. Gibson as counsel of record for James Hill for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Respondent Andrew M. Gibson. (Attorney Andrew M Gibson added to party James Hill(pty:res))(Gibson, Andrew) |
| Filing 7 FINANCIAL ENTRY: Received $5.00 from Aurelio Martin Sepulveda. Re: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254), #1 . Receipt number #9587. (shs) |
Filing 6
ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE TO PETITION by Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. IT IS ORDERED: that Within 14 days of the date of this Order, Respondent must file and serve a notice of appearance that designates the Deputy Attorney General(s) in charge of the case. Respondent should file and serve an Answer to the Petition not later than 12/18/2023. Notice: The court has issued a ruling on preliminary review. Pursuant to the Agreement on Acceptance of Service between the Clerk of Court and the California Attorney Generals Office, this Notice constitutes service under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. Motions to Dismiss shall be filed by 12/1/2023. (Attachments: #1 Attachment.Petition.Part1, #2 Attachment.Petition.Part2, #3 Attachment.Petition.Part3, #4 Attachment.Petition.Part4, #5 Attachment.Petition.Part5) (es)
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF REFERENCE to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case has been assigned to the calendar of the Honorable District Judge Christina A. Snyder and referred to Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth, who is authorized to consider preliminary matters and conduct all further hearings as may be appropriate or necessary. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-2.4, the Court must be notified within five (5) days of any address change. See notice for additional details. (lh) |
| Filing 4 Notice Re: Discrepancies in Filing of Habeas Corpus Petition (CV-111). Upon submission of your petition for writ of habeas corpus, it was noted that you did not pay the appropriate filing fee. If you are unable to pay the entire filing fee at this time, you must sign and complete the Request to Proceed Without Prepayment of Filing Fees with Declaration in Support form (CV-60P) attached. You may return your fee waiver and/or payment to any of the Courthouses listed on this notice. If you do not respond within THIRTY DAYS from the date below, your action may be dismissed. Re: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254), #1 (lh) |
| Filing 3 ELECTION REGARDING CONSENT to Proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge Declined, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636c filed by Petitioner Aurelio Martin Sepulveda. The Petitioner does not consent. (lh) |
| Filing 2 MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities; and Declaration in Support of, filed by Petitioner Aurelio Martin Sepulveda. Re: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254), #1 (lh) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person In State Custody (28:2254). Case assigned to Judge Christina A. Snyder and referred to Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. (Filing Fee $5 DUE), filed by Petitioner Aurelio Martin Sepulveda. (lh) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Aurelio Martin Sepulveda v. James Hill | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Aurelio Martin Sepulveda | |
| 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: James Hill | |
| Represented By: | Andrew M Gibson |
| 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.
