Morgande v. Tilton et al
| Begoia Morgande |
| James E. Tilton and D. K. Sisto |
| 2:2007cv01824 |
| September 6, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Solano |
| Edmund F. Brennan |
| Frank C. Damrell |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
42
MANDATE of USCA as to 36 Motion for Certificate of Appealability: The judgment of this Court, entered 4/12/2012, takes effect this date. (Michel, G)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER signed by Circuit Judge Mary M. Schroeder on 4/25/2012 DENYING 39 Application for a Certificate of Appealability as moot. (Michel, G)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER signed by Circuit Judge Mary M. Schroeder on 3/9/2012 ORDERING 36 Morgande's motion to reopen the case is DENIED. In order that Morgande may seek review of this decision, Morgande's motion for a certificate of appealability is GRANTED on the issue of whether this court has the authority to reopen the time to appeal. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER signed by Circuit Judge Mary M. Schroeder on 01/13/12 ORDERING that Petitioner's 34 motion to extend the time to file a notice of appeal is DENIED. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing
29
ORDER signed by Circuit Judge Mary M. Schroeder on 8/13/09 ORDERING that petitioner's petition for writ of hc is DENIED. This case is dismissed and closed.(Kastilahn, A)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
