Muhammad v. Sisto
| Shaka Senegal Muhammad |
| D.K. Sisto |
| 2:2009cv02503 |
| September 8, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Lassen |
| John F. Moulds |
| None |
| 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
36
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 05/20/11 recommending that respondents' 12/20/10 motion to dismiss 30 be granted; and petitioner's second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed without prejudice, for failure to exhaust state remedies. MOTION to DISMISS 30 referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Objections due within 21 days. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
32
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/15/11 ORDERING that petitioner show cause, within 21 days, first, why his failure to oppose respondents December 20, 2010 motion to dismiss should not be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion, and second, file an opposition to the motion to dismiss.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/13/10 DENYING without prejudice 23 Motion for judicial notice. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/8/10 ORDERING that 16 Motion to Dismiss is granted; The amended petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed; and within 30 days from the date of this order, petitioner shall complete the Notice of Amendment and submit to the court the completed Notice of Amendment; and an original and one copy of the Second Amended Petition.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 01/06/10DIRECTING RESPONDENT to File a Response to Petition within 60 days from the date of this order. Clerk to serve a copy of this order, a copy of the Petition and the Order re Consent on the Attorney General. (cc: Michael Farrell, Attorney General) (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
7
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 12/22/09 ORDERING that petitioner is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis; Petitioner's amended application for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED with leave to file, within 30 days from t he date of this order, an amended petition raising only the first claim from the amended petition. Petitioner is granted 30 days in which to file a new civil rights complaint. Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the court's form for application for writ of habeas corpus and a civil rights complaint, and a request to proceed in forma pauperis.(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: Muhammad 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: Shaka Senegal Muhammad | |
| 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.
