Rhodes v. Medina et al
| Zachary C. Rhodes |
| Angel Medina and Attorney General of the State of Colorado, The |
| 1:2010cv00550 |
| March 9, 2010 |
| US District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Denver Office |
| Boyd N. Boland |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
34
ORDER RETURNING 19 STATE COURT RECORD. By Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 10/25/12. (Attachments: # 1 Letter) (mnfsl, )
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER. Applicant Zachary C. Rhodes' 1 Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is denied. No certificate of appealability will issue because Applicant has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. This case is dismissed with prejudice. By Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 6/10/11. (mnf, )
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER FOR STATE COURT RECORD. Within thirty (30) days from the date of this order the Respondents shall file with the Clerk of the Court a copy of the complete record of Applicant's state court proceedings in People v. Zachary Caine Rhodes, Arapahoe County District Court Case No. 02CR2008, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 3/23/11. (mnf, )
|
|
Filing
2
ORDER to File Pre-Answer Response. Ordered that within 21 days Respondents shall file a Pre-Answer. Ordered that within 21 days of the filing of the Pre-Answer Applicant may file a Reply by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 03/12/10. (jjh, )
|
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 Colorado 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.
