Rollo v. Subia et al
Gary Rollo |
R Subia and Attorney General CA |
2:2007cv02421 |
November 9, 2007 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Sacramento Office |
Amador |
Garland E. Burrell |
Dale A. Drozd |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 25 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Terry J. Hatter, Jr on 01/14/11 DENYING 21 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Williams, D) |
Filing 17 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Terry J. Hatter, Jr on 6/22/10 ORDERING that the Petition 1 is DENIED. CASE CLOSED. (Mena-Sanchez, L) |
Filing 5 ORDER signed by Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/14/07 ORDERING that petitioner's appl to proceed IFP is GRANTED. Respondents' response to the habeas petition shall be filed within 30 days from the date of this order. If the response is an answer , petitioner's reply, if any, shall be filed and served within 30 days after service of the answer. If the response is a motion, petitioner's oppos or statement of non-oppos shall be filed and served within 30 days after service of the mot ion. Respondents' reply, if any, shall be filed and served within 15 days thereafter. The Clerk shall serve a copy of this order and a copy of the petition for writ of hc on Michael Farrell, Sr Asst AG. Petitioner's 11/9/07 requests for appointment of counsel, an evidentiary hearing, and judicial notice are DENIED without prejudice.(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.