Stinson v. Sisto
| 3:2006cv03585 |
| June 5, 2006 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Francisco Office |
| Maxine M. Chesney |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| 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
52
ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY; DIRECTING CLERK TO FORWARD FILE TO NINTH CIRCUIT. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on January 15, 2010. (mmcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/15/2010)
|
|
Filing
48
CLERK'S JUDGMENT: The petition is hereby DISMISSED as moot. (tl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/3/2009)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO SERVE RESPONDENT WITH ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND PETITIONER'S RESPONSE THERETO (DOCKET NOS. 43 & 44); SCHEDULING REPLY. The Court hereby DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to serve respondent with a copy of the order t o show cause and petitioner's response. (Docket Nos. 43 & 44 ). Respondent shall file a reply to the response within twenty (20) days of the date this order is filed. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on July 9, 2009. (mmcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/9/2009) Modified on 7/10/2009 (aaa, COURT STAFF).
|
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 Northern 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: Stinson v. Sisto | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
