Eugene Everett Welch v. Board of Prison Terms et al
Eugene Everett Welch |
Board of Prison Terms, Michael Prizmich and Booker T Welch |
2:2009cv03120 |
November 10, 2009 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Sacramento Office |
Amador |
Dale A. Drozd |
Dale A. Drozd |
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 22 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 8/21/11 RECOMMENDING that 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be denied; referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 21 days.(Dillon, M) |
Filing 21 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/20/10 ordering that petitioner's letters filed on 06/07/10 and 11/12/10 shall be placed in the file. (Plummer, M) |
Filing 15 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/8/10 DENYING 14 Motion to Appoint Counsel without prejudice.(Dillon, M) |
Filing 6 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/16/09 ordering petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis 1 is granted and DIRECTING 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: Jennifer A. Neill, Attorney General) (Plummer, 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
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.