Darrell Sharp v. Lynn Guyer

Darrell Sharp v. Lynn Guyer

Petitioner:	DARRELL DEAN SHARP
Respondent:	LYNN GUYER, Warden
Case Number:	19-71069
Filed:	May 3, 2019
Court:	U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit:	Other

RSS Track this Docket

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 13, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed	Document Text
June 13, 2019	Filing 2 Filed order (WILLIAM C. CANBY, SUSAN P. GRABER and MARY H. MURGUIA) The application for authorization to file a second or successive 28 U.S.C. 2254 habeas corpus petition in the district court is denied. The applicant has not made a prima facie showing under 28 U.S.C. 2244(b)(2) that: (A) the claim relies on a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable; or (B)(i) the factual predicate for the claim could not have been discovered previously through the exercise of due diligence; and (ii) the facts underlying the claim, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the applicant guilty of the underlying offense. Any pending motions are denied as moot. No further filings will be entertained in this case. DENIED. [11330911] (JBS) [Entered: 06/13/2019 04:48 PM]
April 30, 2019	Filing 1 Application for leave to file a second or successive petition filed. (Research) [11285486][COURT UPDATE: New Documents Attached, resent NDA,--[Edited 05/03/2019 by BY](Original sent to SMS) (BY) [Entered: 05/03/2019 07:21 AM]

Date Filed

Document Text

June 13, 2019

Filing 2 Filed order (WILLIAM C. CANBY, SUSAN P. GRABER and MARY H. MURGUIA) The application for authorization to file a second or successive 28 U.S.C. 2254 habeas corpus petition in the district court is denied. The applicant has not made a prima facie showing under 28 U.S.C. 2244(b)(2) that: (A) the claim relies on a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable; or (B)(i) the factual predicate for the claim could not have been discovered previously through the exercise of due diligence; and (ii) the facts underlying the claim, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the applicant guilty of the underlying offense. Any pending motions are denied as moot. No further filings will be entertained in this case. DENIED. [11330911] (JBS) [Entered: 06/13/2019 04:48 PM]

April 30, 2019

Filing 1 Application for leave to file a second or successive petition filed. (Research) [11285486][COURT UPDATE: New Documents Attached, resent NDA,--[Edited 05/03/2019 by BY](Original sent to SMS) (BY) [Entered: 05/03/2019 07:21 AM]

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.

Search for this case: Darrell Sharp v. Lynn Guyer
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: DARRELL DEAN SHARP
Represented By:	Darrell Dean Sharp
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: LYNN GUYER, Warden
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?