Torres v. Virga
Petitioner: Juan Torres
Respondent: Tim Virga
Case Number: 2:2012cv01358
Filed: May 18, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Dale A. Drozd
Presiding Judge: Garland E. Burrell
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
February 11, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 69 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 2/10/16 ordering the stay order filed 10/16/15 docket entry 62 is amended as follows: Paragraph 3 on page 2 shall be modified to read, "3. Petitioner shall diligently proceed to exhaust h is state court remedies by presenting all his unexhausted federal habeas claims, as well as the facts in support thereof, to the California Courts beginning no later than 30 days from the resolution by the United States Supreme Court of Montgomery vs. Louisianna, case no 14-280", the rest of the 10/16/15 order is unchanged and remains in effect. (Plummer, M)
August 19, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 60 ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 08/18/15 vacating 57 Motion to Stay. Also, RECOMMENDING that petitioner's 7/29/15 motion to stay habeas proceedings pending exhaustion 57 be granted. Peti tioner be ordered to present all of his unexhausted federal habeas claims as well as the facts in support thereof, to the California Supreme Court in a state habeas corpus petition to be filed within 30 days from the resolution by the United States S upreme Court of Montgomery v. Louisiana, Case No. 14-280. This action be stayed and the Clerk of the Court be directed to administratively close the case. Petitioner be ordered to file and serve a status report in this case on the first court day of each month; and petitioner be ordered to file and serve a motion to lift the stay of this action, along with a proposed amended petition containing only exhausted claims, within 30 days after petitioner is serve with the California Supreme Court's order disposing of the state exhaustion petition. MOTION to STAY 57 referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
April 30, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 56 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/29/2015 ORDERING that this action is STAYED for 90 days; during the 90-day period of the stay, petitioner's counsel shall keep the court apprised of any legal developments that would justify a lifting of the stay.(Yin, K)
February 17, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 54 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/13/15 ORDERING that this action is stayed for sixty days from the date of this order. During the sixty day period of the stay, petitioners counsel shall keep the court apprised of any legal developments that would justify a lifting of the stay.(Dillon, M)
January 14, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 52 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/13/15 ordering ( Status Conference set for 2/13/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27 (DAD) before Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd.) (Plummer, M)
October 20, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 50 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/17/14 ordering this action is stayed for 60 days from the date of this order. (See order for further details)(Plummer, M)
August 13, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 48 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 08/12/14 ordering this action is stayed for an additional 60 days from the date of this order. During the 60 days period of the stay, petitioner's counsel shall keep the court apprised of any l egal developments that would justify a lifting of the stay. In addition, if the stay has not been lifted before the 60 days period of the stay expires, petitioner's counsel shall notify the court and opposing counsel of the then-current status of the petitione for certiorari filed in DeMola v. Cavazos, Acting Warden, 13-10288. After the stay is lifted, the parties shall file a proposed schedule for the filing of a traverse and further briefing on the applicability of the decisions in Miller v. Alabama and Bell v. Uribe to this case. (Plummer, M)
May 20, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 46 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/19/2014 STAYING this action for 60 days; petitioner's counsel shall keep the court apprised of any legal developements that would justify a lifting of the stay; if the stay has not been lifted before the 60 day period of the stay expires, petitioner's counsel shall notify the court and opposing counsel of the then-current status of the petitions pending before the U.S. Supreme Court that were discussed at the motion hearing; and after the stay is lifted, the parties shall file a proposed schedule for filing of traverse and any further briefing addressing the applicability of the decisions in Miller v. Alabama to this case. (Yin, K)
January 28, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 40 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 01/27/14 ordering petitioner shall file his supplemental briefing, as outlined above, on or before 04/24/12. Respondent shall file a responsive brief on or before 05/27/14. Petitioner shall file an y reply brief on or before 6/10/14. Petitioner may serve a subpoena duces tecum commanding attorney Douglas A. Goss to produce and permit inspection and copying of his files relating to the defense of petitioner in San Joaquin County Superior Court in case No. SF103743B. (Plummer, M)
October 10, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 37 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/10/2013 ORDERING the status conference currently scheduled for 10/11/2013 is VACATED; petitioner shall file his traverse, or appropriate motion, and supplemental briefing, as outlined in this order, on or before 1/24/2014; respondent shall file a responsive brief on or before 2/24/2014; and petitioner shall file any reply brief on or before 3/10/2014. (Waggoner, D)
September 24, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 35 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/24/2013 and agreed between the parties to CONTINUE the 9/27/2013 status conference to 10/11/2013 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 27 (DAD) before Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd. (Yin, K)
September 3, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 31 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 08/30/13 ordering the Office of the Federal Defender is appointed to represent petitioner. The clerk of the court shall serve a copy of this order and a copy of the petition on David Porter, Assistan t Federal Defender. ( Status Conference set for 9/27/2013 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27 (DAD) before Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd for the purposes of setting a schedule for the filing of the requested further briefing.)(cc: David Porter, Federal Defender) (Plummer, M)
August 2, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 8/2/2012, DENYING petitioner's 13 motion for the appointment of counsel. (Yin, K)
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: Torres v. Virga
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Juan Torres
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: Tim Virga
Represented By: Jennevee Han De Guzman
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?