Armas v. People Of California
Defendant: People Of California
Petitioner: Amado Armas
Case Number: 1:2011cv00772
Filed: May 12, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Fresno Office
County: Merced
Presiding Judge: Sheila K. Oberto
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 29, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 35 ORDER Denying the First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus; ORDER Directing the Entry of Judgment for Respondent and Declining to Issue a Certificate of Appealability, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 9/27/14. CASE CLOSED. (Verduzco, M)
February 16, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER GRANTING 22 Petitioner's Motion to File a First Amended Petition no Later Than Ninety (90) Days After the Date of Service of This Order; ORDER SETTING New Briefing Schedule; ORDER DISMISSING 25 Respondent's Motion for an Extension of Time as Moot, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 2/16/2012. Amended Petition Due by 5/21/2012. (Marrujo, C)
January 12, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER disregarding 16 Proposed Substitution of Attorney signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 1/12/2012. (Lundstrom, T)
September 9, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER VACATING 9 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER DISCHARGING 6 Order to Show Cause; ORDER GRANTING Petitioner Leave to File a Motion to Amend the Petition to Name a Proper Respondent No Later Than Thirty (30) Days After the Date of Service of This Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 09/08/2011. ( 30 -Day Deadline)(Martin-Gill, S)
July 29, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 9 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that the Petition be DISMISSED for Failure to Prosecute and Follow a Court Order re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 7/29/2011. Referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections to F&R due within thirty (30) days. (Jessen, A)
June 27, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER Directing Petitioner To SHOW CAUSE In Writing Within Twenty-One (21) Days Why The Action Should Not Be Dismissed For Failure To File A Motion To Amend The Petition And To Follow An Order Of The Court (Doc. 4 ), Deadline: Twenty-One (21) Days, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 6/24/2011. Show Cause Response due by 7/21/2011. (Fahrney, E)
May 17, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER Granting Petitioner Leave to File a Motion to Amend the Petition and Name a Proper Respondent no Later than Thirty (30) Days after the date of Service of this Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 05/16/2011. Motion to Amend Petition due by 6/20/2011. (Flores, E)
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Armas v. People Of California
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: People Of California
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: Amado Armas
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?