Bunn v. Lopez et al
Petitioner: Reginald Thomas Bunn, Jr.
Respondent: Raul Lopez and Matthew Cate
Case Number: 2:2011cv01373
Filed: May 20, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Dale A. Drozd
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
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
July 26, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 48 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 7/25/16 recommending that petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus be denied. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England Jr. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
March 17, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 45 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 3/17/16 ORDERING that within 14 days from the date of this order, the parties may file briefs stating their objections, if any, to a stay of this action for the purpose of allowing petitioner to exhaust his Eighth Amendment claim in state court. If the parties agree that a stay is advisable, they may file a stipulation to that effect. (Dillon, M)
January 28, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 42 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 1/28/16 ORDERING that within 30 days from the date of this order, petitioner shall file a supplemental brief addressing his claim that his sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. Respondent may file a reply within 30 days after petitioners brief is filed. (Dillon, M)
May 6, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 39 CJA 20 APPOINTING ATTORNEY signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/21/2012 Attorney Benjamin P. Ramos for Reginald Thomas Bunn, Jr. (Reader, L)
November 14, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 36 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/13/2012 VACATING the 11/16/2012 status conference; petitioner shall file a supplemental brief addressing the merits of his habeas claims by 1/18/2013; respondent shall file a supplemental brief by 2/19/2013; and this matter will thereafter stand submitted for decision.(Yin, K)
October 16, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 34 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/15/12 ORDERING that a further status conference will be held on November 16, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. in courtroom #27. Any party may appear telephonically. The parties may file a joint status report by November 13, 2012, if they reach agreement as to how this matter should proceed. If they do not reach agreement, both parties shall file a status report by November 13, 2012.(Dillon, M)
September 24, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 09/21/12 that Benjamin Ramos, Attorney at Law, shall be substituted in as appointed counsel for petitioner in place of the Office of the Federal Defender for the Eastern District of California. (Plummer, M)
August 27, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 08/24/12 granting 25 Motion to Appoint Counsel. The federal defender is appointed to represent petitioner. The clerk of the court is directed to serve a copy of the petition and this order on Caro lyn Wiggin, Assistant Federal Defender. A status conference is set for 10/12/12 at 10:00 a.m. in courtroom 27. All parties shall appear at the status conference by counsel. 14 days prior to the conference, the parties shall file and serve status reports. (Plummer, M)
May 24, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/24/12 DENYING 21 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Meuleman, A)
February 2, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/1/12 denying 13 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Dillon, M)
October 18, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/17/2011 ORDERING that ptnr's 3 motion for a stay and abeyance is DENIED as moot; ptnr's 6 motion for an extension of time is GRANTED; and w/in 60 days ptnr shall file an amended petition containing all of his exhausted claims in this action. (Yin, K)
September 9, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/8/11 ORDERING 2 Motion to Proceed IFP is GRANTED; Within 30 days of the date of service of this order, petitioner shall either: file an amended petition containing all of his exhausted claims; or (b) file a declaration explaining the status of any pending habeas corpus proceedings in state court; and the Clerk is directed to send petitioner the court's form for filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus.(Matson, R)
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: Bunn v. Lopez 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: Reginald Thomas Bunn, Jr.
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: Raul Lopez
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: Matthew Cate
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?