Lewis v. Evans
Case Number: 2:2005cv01136
Filed: June 8, 2005
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
Presiding Judge: Edmund F. Brennan
Presiding Judge: Garland E. Burrell
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
July 8, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 53 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 7/8/2011 ORDERING that Ptnr's 50 Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED without prejudice to its renewal in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Ptnr's 51 Motion for the Production of Documents is GRANTED. The Clerk to send a copy of docket nos. 4 and 8 to Ptnr. (Zignago, K.)
March 31, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 45 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 03/31/11 recommending that petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus be denied. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell. Objections due within 21 days. (Plummer, M)
August 3, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 39 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 8/3/10 ORDERING that within thirty days from the filed date of this order, respondent shall lodge with this court the trial exhibits consisting of photographs of the live lineup in which petitioner was one of the participants. (Dillon, M)
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: Lewis v. Evans
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?