Contreras v. Sisto

Contreras v. Sisto

Petitioner:	Ernest Contreras
Respondent:	D. K. Sisto
Case Number:	2:2008cv00364
Filed:	February 19, 2008
Court:	U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office:	Sacramento Office
County:	Solano
Presiding Judge:	Edmund F. Brennan
Presiding Judge:	Lawrence K. Karlton
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
June 16, 2010	Filing 17 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Charlene H. Sorrentino on 6/15/10 RECOMMENDING that petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus be denied. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Objections due within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Becknal, R)
April 1, 2009	Filing 5 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 04/01/09 ordering petitioner's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis 4 is granted. Respondent shall file and serve either an answer or a motion in response to petitioner's ap plication within 60 days from the date of this order. Petitioner's reply, if any, shall be filed and serve within 30 days of service of an answer. The clerk of the court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of petitioner' s 02/08/08 petition for a writ of habeas corpus with any and all attachments on Michael Patrick Farrell, Senior Assistant Attorney General. The clerk of the court shall also serve on the Senior Assistant Attorney General the consent form used in this court. (cc: Michael Farrell)(Plummer, M)

Date Filed

Document Text

June 16, 2010

Filing 17 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Charlene H. Sorrentino on 6/15/10 RECOMMENDING that petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus be denied. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Objections due within 21 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Becknal, R)

April 1, 2009

Filing 5 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 04/01/09 ordering petitioner's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis 4 is granted. Respondent shall file and serve either an answer or a motion in response to petitioner's ap plication within 60 days from the date of this order. Petitioner's reply, if any, shall be filed and serve within 30 days of service of an answer. The clerk of the court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of petitioner' s 02/08/08 petition for a writ of habeas corpus with any and all attachments on Michael Patrick Farrell, Senior Assistant Attorney General. The clerk of the court shall also serve on the Senior Assistant Attorney General the consent form used in this court. (cc: Michael Farrell)(Plummer, M)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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: Contreras v. Sisto
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Ernest Contreras
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 ]
Respondent: D. K. Sisto
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?