Rodriguez v. Dickinson et al
Petitioner: Carmelo Rodriguez
Respondent: Katheleen L. Dickinson and A. Schwarzenegger
Case Number: 2:2010cv00048
Filed: January 6, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Solano
Presiding Judge: Lawrence K. Karlton
Presiding Judge: Gregory G. Hollows
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
June 3, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 37 RELATED CASE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 6/3/11 ORDERING that this case be related to case number CIV S-11-1244 KJN and that the related case be reassigned to Judge Gregory G. Hollows for all further proceedings. Henceforth, the caption on documents filed in the reassigned case shall be shown as No. CIV S- 11-1244 GGH P. Clerk of the Court is directed to make appropriate adjustment in the assignment of civil cases to compensate for this reassignment.(Dillon, M)
May 5, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 36 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 5/5/11 DENYING 35 Motion for Reconsideration. (Dillon, M)
March 9, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 03/09/11 denying 29 Motion to Stay. Petitioner must file his briefing as set forth in the 03/03/11 order. (Plummer, M)
February 4, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 25 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 2/4/2011 ORDERING that the parties have 21 days to provide simultaneous supplemental briefing, in light of the very recent decision noted in this order, demonstrating why the instant petition should not be dismissed. (Yin, K)
September 22, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 23 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 9/21/10 denying 15 Motion for judicial notice. (Dillon, M)
January 21, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 01/21/10 ordering petitioner shall submit within 30 days from the date of this order, an affidavit in support of his request to proceed IFP or the appropriate filing fee. The clerk of the court shall send petitioner a copy of the IFP form used by this district. Also, 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: Michael Farrell, Attorney General) (Plummer, M)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Rodriguez v. Dickinson et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Carmelo Rodriguez
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: Katheleen L. Dickinson
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: A. Schwarzenegger
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?