(HC) Richardson v. Hill
Petitioner: Robert Howard Richardson
Respondent: Rick Hill
Case Number: 2:2018cv01966
Filed: July 16, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Gregory G Hollows
Referring Judge: John A Mendez
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 18, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 31, 2018 Filing 9 CLERK'S NOTICE REASSIGNING CASE (TEXT ONLY) pursuant to Decline of Jurisdiction of US Magistrate Judge, this case has been assigned to District Judge John A. Mendez and Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows. The new case number is: 2:18-cv-1966 JAM GGH (HC). (Plummer, M)
August 31, 2018 SERVICE BY MAIL: 9 Clerk's Notice Reassigning Case, served on Robert Howard Richardson. (Plummer, M)
August 30, 2018 Filing 8 DECLINE to PROCEED BEFORE US MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Rick Hill. Attorney Chan, Maria G. added. (Chan, Maria)
August 23, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER RE CONSENT OR REQUEST FOR REASSIGNMENT Consent or Decline due by 9/27/2018 signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 08/23/18. (Plummer, M)
August 23, 2018 Filing 6 DOCUMENT(S) SERVED ELECTRONICALLY: Petition for writ of habeas corpus #1 served on Tami Krenzin, Attorney General. (Plummer, M)
August 23, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 08/22/18 DENYING #3 Motion to Appoint Counsel. 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: Tami Krenzin, Attorney General) (Plummer, M)
August 23, 2018 SERVICE BY MAIL: #5 Order Directing Respondent to File a Response to the Petition,, Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel, served on Robert Howard Richardson. (Plummer, M)
July 30, 2018 RECEIPT number #CAE200091638 $5.00 fbo Robert Howard Richardson by State of California on 7/30/2018. (Kastilahn, A)
July 17, 2018 Filing 4 PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED; Consent or Decline due by 8/20/2018. (Attachments: #1 Order re Consent) (Fabillaran, J)
July 17, 2018 SERVICE BY MAIL: #4 Prisoner New Case Documents for Magistrate Judge as Presider served on Robert Howard Richardson. (Fabillaran, J)
July 16, 2018 Filing 3 MOTION to APPOINT COUNSEL by Robert Howard Richardson. (Fabillaran, J)
July 16, 2018 Filing 2 MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Robert Howard Richardson. (Fabillaran, J)
July 16, 2018 Filing 1 PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Rick Hill by Robert Howard Richardson. (Fabillaran, J)

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: (HC) Richardson v. Hill
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Rick Hill
Represented By: Maria G. Chan
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: Robert Howard Richardson
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?