Savidge v. Ryan et al
||February 22, 2005
||US District Court for the Eastern District of California
||Lawrence K. Karlton
||Kimberly J. Mueller
|Nature of Suit:
||Habeas Corpus (General)
|Cause of Action:
||28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|January 5, 2011
ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 01/05/11 DENYING 57 Motion to Stay. (Williams, D)
|July 15, 2010
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 07/14/10 ORDERING petitioner's request that the court hold an evidentiary hearing is denied. Petitioner's unopposed requests that the court consider a dditional information in support of his application for writ of habeas corpus 29 , 33 are granted. The information provided to the court by petitioner on 04/28/08 and 05/09/08 is deemed a part of the record considered by the court in making these findings and recommendations. Respondent's 05/02/08 request to redact 31 is granted retroactively to 05/02/08. Also, RECOMMENDING that petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus be granted as to his first claim due to the inf ringment on petitioner's 6th amendment right to counsel as a result of the prosecutor's improper argument. The Federal Defender's Office be appointed to represent petitioner. Respondent be ordered to release petitioner within 60 days unless within that period of time, proceedings are initiated in the California Superior Court for a retrial, and this case be closed. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Objections due within 21 days. (Plummer, M)
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
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?