Quarrels v. Sisto
Antwayne Quarrels |
D.K. Sisto |
2:2009cv01782 |
June 29, 2009 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Sacramento Office |
Solano |
Gregory G. Hollows |
Gregory G. Hollows |
None |
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 21 MEMORANDUM DECISION signed by Senior Judge James K. Singleton on 12/3/2010 ORDERING that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED. In addition, Court declines to issue a Certificate of Appealability. Any further requests for a Certificate of Appealability must be addressed to the Court of Appeals. The Clerk is to enter final judgment accordingly. Civil Case Terminated. CASE CLOSED. (Matson, R) Modified on 12/3/2010 (Streeter, J). |
Filing 17 ORDER signed by Senior Judge James K. Singleton on 7/6/2010 ORDERING that on or before August 6, 2010, each party must separately serve and file a brief, not exceeding 15 pages in length, setting forth the party's position on the impact of Haywa rd on this case, in particular that "[t]he prisoner's aggravated offense does not establish current dangerousness 'unless the record also establishes that something in the prisoner's pre- or post incarceration history, or his or h er current demeanor and mental state' supports the inference of dangerousness." Respondent must specifically identify those characteristics, other than the underlying commitment offense, that support a finding that release of the Petitioner to parole status poses a current threat to public safety, and point to the specific evidence in the record that supports that determination. Not later than 21 days after briefs in paragraph 1 are served and filed, each party may serve and file a reply brief, not to exceed 10 pages in length, addressing those matters addressed in the other party's opening brief. The reply brief may not simply reiterate or restate arguments or issues covered in the party's opening brief.(Duong, D) |
Filing 11 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 07/30/09 ordering that petitioner has discharged his filing fee obligation. (Plummer, M) |
Filing 3 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 7/9/09 ORDERING that petitioner shall submit, within 30 days, an affidavit in support of his request to proceed IFP or the appropriate filing fee; Clerk to send petitioner a copy of the IFP form; Respondent is directed to file a response to petitioners habeas petition within 60 days; Clerk shall serve a copy of this order, the consent/reassignment form, together with a copy of the petition for writ of habeas corpus on Michael Patrick Farrell. (cc Michael Farrell)(Dillon, M) |
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: Quarrels 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: Antwayne Quarrels | |
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.