Ramirez v. Pratt
| Martin Ponce Ramirez |
| Glenn E. Pratt and Rob Bonta |
| 3:2023cv02175 |
| November 24, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| Karen S Crawford |
| Janis L Sammartino |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 18, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
ORDER Dismissing Amended Petition #3 Without Prejudice and Extending Time to Choose Option and Satisfy Filing Fee Requirement. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 1/16/24.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(aas) (jms).
|
|
Filing 3
AMENDED PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS against Glenn E. Pratt and Rob Bonta, filed by Martin Ponce Ramirez. (jms)
|
|
Filing 2
ORDER DISMISSING CASE Without Prejudice. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 12/5/23.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(aas) (jms).
|
|
Filing 1
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus against Glenn E. Pratt (Filing fee $ 5, Fee Not Paid, IFP Not Filed.), filed by Martin Ponce Ramirez. Filed as a 2254 Petition per PSLC. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit)The new case number is 3:23-cv-2175-JLS-KSC. Judge Janis L. Sammartino and Magistrate Judge Karen S. Crawford are assigned to the case.(bdc)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
