Ornelas v. Adams
Petitioner: Daniel Garcia Ornelas
Respondent: D. Adams
Case Number: 3:2009cv00344
Filed: January 26, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: Habeas Corpus (General) Office
County: Kings
Presiding Judge: Maxine M. Chesney
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 20, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 34 ORDER DENYING RENEWED REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL; DENYING HEARING ON STATUS TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL; DIRECTIONS TO CLERK. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on July 20, 2012. (mmcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/20/2012)
May 7, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 28 ORDER DENYING 24 CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on May 7, 2012. (mmcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2012)
October 22, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER GRANTING 14 , 15 , 16 PETITIONER'S REQUESTS TO WITHDRAW PREVIOUSLY FILED TRAVERSE AND FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE NEW TRAVERSE; DIRECTIONS TO CLERK. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on October 22, 2010. (mmcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/22/2010)
January 13, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER GRANTING 8 RESPONDENT'S SECOND REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on January 13, 2010. (mmcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/13/2010)
November 13, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER GRANTING 6 RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on November 13, 2009. (mmcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/13/2009)
August 12, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. The Clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of this order, the petition and all attachments thereto on respondent and respondent's counsel, the Attorney General for the State of California. Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on petitioner, within ninety (90) days of the date this order is filed, an answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas corpus should not be granted based on petitioner's cognizable claims. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on August 12, 2009. (mmcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/12/2009) Modified on 8/13/2009 (aaa, COURT STAFF).
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ornelas v. Adams
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Daniel Garcia Ornelas
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: D. Adams
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?