William Dawes v. The People, et al
| WILLIAM DAWES |
| THE PEOPLE and XAVIER BECERRA |
| 19-56340 |
| November 19, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 10, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: AT): A review of the record suggests that this appeal may be appropriate for summary disposition under Ninth Circuit Rule 3-6(b) because the district court correctly found that appellants challenges to conditions of confinement are not properly brought in a habeas petition. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475 (1973); United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982). Within 21 days after the filing date of this order, appellant shall show cause why summary affirmance of the district courts judgment is not appropriate. If appellant does not comply with this order, this appeal will be automatically dismissed by the Clerk for failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. The briefing schedule is stayed pending further order of the court. [11558415] (RT) [Entered: 01/10/2020 03:49 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed Appellant William Dawes motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None. Served on 12/04/2019. [11529890] (JFF) [Entered: 12/12/2019 10:24 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: CKP): Order to show cause docket fee due [11507940] (CKP) [Entered: 11/21/2019 04:06 PM] |
| Filing 1 Open 9th Circuit docket. No COA order in district court. Record on appeal included: Yes. (Electronic: PACER) [11504483] (RT) [Entered: 11/19/2019 03:48 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
