Garcia v. Neotti

Garcia v. Neotti

Petitioner:	Lenin Garcia
Respondent:	George Neotti
Case Number:	3:2010cv01695
Filed:	August 11, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of California
Office:	San Diego Office
County:	San Diego
Presiding Judge:	Larry Alan Burns
Presiding Judge:	Louisa S Porter
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
August 21, 2013	Filing 15 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 11 as modified.The petitioner's objections are overruled. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied. The Certificate of Appealability is denied. Signed by Judge Larry Alan Burns on 8/21/13. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(kaj)
August 24, 2010	Filing 2 ORDER DISMISSING CASE. The Court dismisses this case without prejudice and with leave to amend. If Petitioner wishes to challenge the validity of a state court conviction via a habeas corpus action, he must submit, no later than October 25, 2010: (1) a copy of this Order with the $5.00 fee OR with adequate proof of his inability to pay the fee; AND (2) a First Amended Petition which cures the pleading deficiencies outlined in this Order. If Petitioner wishes to challenge the conditions of h is confinement, he must file a new civil complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 which will be given a new civil case number. Signed by Judge Larry Alan Burns on 8/20/10 (forms mailed to petitioner)(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(kaj)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 21, 2013

Filing 15 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 11 as modified.The petitioner's objections are overruled. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied. The Certificate of Appealability is denied. Signed by Judge Larry Alan Burns on 8/21/13. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(kaj)

August 24, 2010

Filing 2 ORDER DISMISSING CASE. The Court dismisses this case without prejudice and with leave to amend. If Petitioner wishes to challenge the validity of a state court conviction via a habeas corpus action, he must submit, no later than October 25, 2010: (1) a copy of this Order with the $5.00 fee OR with adequate proof of his inability to pay the fee; AND (2) a First Amended Petition which cures the pleading deficiencies outlined in this Order. If Petitioner wishes to challenge the conditions of h is confinement, he must file a new civil complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 which will be given a new civil case number. Signed by Judge Larry Alan Burns on 8/20/10 (forms mailed to petitioner)(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(kaj)

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Garcia v. Neotti
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Lenin Garcia
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: George Neotti
Represented By:	Attorney General
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?