Montgomery v. Sisto
Brian Keith Montgomery |
D.K. Sisto |
2:2008cv03180 |
July 21, 2008 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Sacramento Office |
Solano |
Kimberly J. Mueller |
General |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 26 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Timothy J. Bommer on 3/31/11 ORDERING that Petitioner's 25 March 29, 2011 request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is GRANTED.(Duong, D) |
Filing 18 ORDER and AMENDED FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Timothy J. Bommer on 1/31/11 ORDERING that the 12/9/10 ORDER, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 16 is VACATED in PART. The 12/09/10 Order, Findings and Recommendations directed th at the Clerk of Court randomly assign a District Judge to this matter. District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. was subsequently assigned. To the extent that the 12/09/10 Order ordered the Clerk of Court to randomly assign a District Judge to this cas e, that portion (and that portion only) of the 12/09/10, Findings and Recommendations is not vacated; Petitioner's Requet for an OSC is DENIED as MOOT and Petitioner's Request for the appointment of Counsel is DENIED. Furthermore, IT IS REC OMMENDED that the Petition for writ of habas corpus 1 be DENIED. These FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS are submitted to U.S. District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Within twenty-one days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, any party may file written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties.(Mena-Sanchez, L) |
Filing 16 ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Timothy J. Bommer on 12/09/10 RECOMMENDING that 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be DENIED; ORDERING Petitioners request for an order to show cause is DENIED AS MOOT; and Petitioners request for the appointment of counsel is DENIED. Objections due within 21 days after being served with these F&R's. (Williams, D) |
Filing 13 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 07/15/10 ordering that the stay imposed by order of 06/19/09 is lifted. (Plummer, M) |
Filing 6 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 4/3/2009 ORDERING 1 Respondents are directed to file a response to petitioner's application within 60 days from the date of this order; Petitioner's reply, if any, shall be filed and served within 30 days of service of an answer; and the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28:2254 on DAG/Michael P. Farrell. (Reader, L) |
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
Search for this case: Montgomery 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: Brian Keith Montgomery | |
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 | |
Represented By: | Andrew Robert Woodrow |
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.