Elroy Gomez v. William Sullivan
| ELROY PEDRO GOMEZ |
| WILLIAM JOE SULLIVAN, Warden |
| 21-16999 |
| December 1, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 18, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 Filed order (RICHARD A. PAEZ and ANDREW D. HURWITZ, Circuit Judges) : This appeal is from the district courts final order and judgment denying relief under 28 U.S.C. 2254. The request for a certificate of appealability (Docket Entry Nos. [ # 2 ] & [ # 3 ] ) is granted with respect to the following issue: whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance. See 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(3); see also 9th Cir. R. 22-1(e). The opening brief is due April 19, 2022; the answering brief is due May 19, 2022; the optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. The Clerk will serve on appellant a copy of the After Opening a Case Counseled Cases document. If William Joe Sullivan is no longer the appropriate appellee in this case, counsel for appellee must notify this court by letter of the appropriate substitute party within 21 days of the filing date of this order. See Fed. R. App. P. 43(c). [12343116] (RT) [Entered: 01/18/2022 12:54 PM] |
| Filing 4 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: NA): The court has received your recent filing regarding the status of appellants request for a certificate of appealability in Case No. 20-17293 and alerting us to the courts mistaken processing of appellants December 28, 2020 notice of appeal. The docketing error has been corrected and this court has opened Case No. 21-16999 to address the request for a certificate of appealability from the district courts October 16, 2020, judgment. Appellants requests for a certificate of appealability have not yet come before a panel of judges, but we anticipate a decision soon. If you do not hear from the court by the end of March 2022, please feel free to write back. [12305398] [20-17293, 21-16999] (RT) [Entered: 12/03/2021 03:18 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed (ECF) Appellant Elroy Pedro Gomez Supplemental Motion for certificate of appealability. Date of service: 12/01/2021. [12303041]--[COURT ENTERED FILING. Originally filed in case 20-17293.] (SLM) [Entered: 12/01/2021 03:50 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) Appellant Elroy Pedro Gomez Motion for certificate of appealability. Date of service: 12/01/2021. [12302999]--[COURT ENTERED FILING. Originally filed in case 20-17293.] (SLM) [Entered: 12/01/2021 03:28 PM] |
| Filing 1 Open 9th Circuit docket: needs certificate of appealability. Date COA denied in DC: 10/16/2020. Record on appeal included: Yes. [12302767] --[Edited: Updated docket text to reflect correct COA date. 12/01/2021 by TYL] (RT) [Entered: 12/01/2021 02:16 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.
| Search for this case: Elroy Gomez v. William Sullivan | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner / appellant: ELROY PEDRO GOMEZ | |
| Represented By: | William Richard Such |
| 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 / appellee: WILLIAM JOE SULLIVAN, Warden | |
| Represented By: | Lisa Ashley Ott |
| 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.
