Goff v. Salinas
| Thomas L Goff |
| M. Salinas |
| 2:2011cv03410 |
| December 22, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Gregory G. Hollows |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| 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
40
ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 3/29/2013. Court is DECLINING to issue petitioner's 36 Certificate of Appealability. Petitioner's 38 Motion for Appointment of Counsel is DENIED without prejudice to its renewal before Court of Appeals. (Marciel, M)
|
|
Filing
30
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/31/13 denying 28 Motion for Reconsideration. Also, RECOMMENDING that respondent's motion to dismiss filed 06/29/12 18 be granted for failure to exhaust state court remedies. The clerk of court be directed to close this action. MOTION to DISMISS 18 referred to Judge William B. Shubb. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 9/11/12 DENYING without prejudice 19 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 12/22/11 ORDERING that in case number 2:11-cv-3251 GGH, Petitioners challenge to (a) his 2010 prison disciplinary conviction forpossession of alcohol within the institution is severed from (b) hi s challenge to the 2010 finding of guilt in a prison disciplinary hearing on a charge of forgery/falsification of documents; The Clerk of the Court is directed to open a new habeas action as to (a) in # 1 above, and the instant petition is to proceed as to (b) in #1. The Clerk of the Court is further directed to: (a) to assign the new action to the undersigned magistrate judge to whom the instant case is assigned and to make appropriate adjustment in the assignment of civil cases to compensate f or such assignment; (b) File and docket a copy of this order in the additional new case file opened for petitioner; (c) Place a copy of the petition filed on December 7, 2011, in the separate actions case docket; ( d) send petitioner two new forms fo r filing a habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 used in this district; Petitioners 2 request for in forma pauperis status is GRANTED as to both petitions; The December 7, 2011 petition is dismissed in both cases with leave to amend within thirty days, as set forth herein; Petitioners December 7, 2011 motion for appointment of counsel 3 is DENIED without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings. (The new case number is 2:11-cv-3410 GGH)(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: Goff v. Salinas | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Thomas L Goff | |
| 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: M. Salinas | |
| 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.
