Broadbent v. Martel
Petitioner: Jamual Broadbent
Respondent: M. Martel
Case Number: 2:2011cv01711
Filed: June 24, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Amador
Presiding Judge: Craig M. Kellison
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
January 29, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 37 ORDER signed by Senior Judge James K. Singleton on 1/29/13 DENYING 35 and 36 Motions to Proceed IFP as moot. (Manzer, C)
November 20, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 29 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER signed by Senior Judge James K. Singleton, Jr. on 11/20/2012 ORDERING that the Petition under 28:2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Court DECLINES to issue a Certificate of Appealability; Any further request for a Certificate of Appealability must be addressed to the Court of Appeals; the Clerk of the Court is to enter judgment accordingly. CASE CLOSED (Reader, L)
March 13, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 25 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 3/12/2012 DENYING petitioner's 24 motion for the appointment of counsel. (Yin, K)
December 2, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 12/2/11 ORDERING that respondents 20 request to withdraw his motion to dismiss is GRANTED; the Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate respondents motion to dismiss 13 as a pending motion on the courts docket; Petitioners motion for appointment of counsel 14 is DENIED without prejudice; Respondent shall file an answer to the petition, consistent with the requirements of the courts July 27, 2011, order, within 60 days of the date of this order; and Petitioners traverse shall be filed within 30 days of service of respondents answer. (Dillon, M)
October 6, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 10/5/11 ORDERING that the ruling on 14 MOTION to APPOINT COUNSEL is DEFERRED until after such time as petitioner files his pro se response to respondents motion to dismiss, which is due within 30 days of the date of this order.(Dillon, M)
June 29, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 6/29/11 ORDERING Petitioner to submit on the form provided by the Clerk of the Court,within 30 days from the date of this order, a complete application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, with the certification required by Rule 3(a)(2), or pay the appropriate filing fee; and FURTHER ORDERING the Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner a new form Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner. (Meuleman, A)
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: Broadbent v. Martel
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: M. Martel
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 ]
Petitioner: Jamual Broadbent
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?