Amy Bonning v. Stephen Bartlett, et al
AMY ROSE BONNING |
STEPHEN BARTLETT, Ada County Sheriff, BRAD LITTLE, Governor, STEVEN HIPPLER, Judge and DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH |
21-35611 |
July 30, 2021 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
Other |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on September 20, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 4 Filed order (KIM MCLANE WARDLAW and BRIDGET S. BADE) On June 8, 2021, appellant filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 which included a challenge to the denial of bail in her state court criminal proceedings. The district court severed the bail challenge for consideration under 28 U.S.C. 2241, but otherwise permitted the 42 U.S.C. 1983 action to proceed. The 1983 action remains pending in the district court. This appeal is only from the district courts dismissal without prejudice of appellants bail challenge as it arose in habeas under 2241. On this narrow issue, the request for a certificate of appealability (Docket Entry No. 3) is denied. See 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Any pending motions are denied as moot. DENIED. [12233050] (WL) [Entered: 09/20/2021 11:52 AM] |
Filing 3 Filed Appellant Amy Rose Bonning motion Social Emergency for Pandemic Safety. Deficiencies: None. Served on 08/12/2021. [12205873] (DJV) [Entered: 08/19/2021 11:20 AM] |
Filing 2 Filed Appellant Amy Rose Bonning motion to appoint counsel. Deficiencies: None. Served on 08/12/2021. [12205867] (DJV) [Entered: 08/19/2021 11:18 AM] |
Filing 1 Open 9th Circuit docket: needs certificate of appealability. Date COA denied in DC: 07/19/2021. Record on appeal included: Yes. [12188085] (RT) [Entered: 07/30/2021 01:08 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.