Fields v. Blades

Petitioner: Zane Jack Fields
Respondent: Randy Blades
Case Number: 1:1995cv00422
Filed: October 27, 1995
Court: US District Court for the District of Idaho
Office: Boise - Southern Office
County: Ada - Southern
Presiding Judge: Edward J. Lodge
Nature of Suit: Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
March 21, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 369 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 342 Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs)
November 28, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 367 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 327 MOTION to Amend/Correct 271 Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Zane Jack Fields. Within 60 days after entry of this Order, Respondent mayif he so choosesfile a motion to dismis s Claims 1, 6, 11, and 44 on any ground supported by the record. If Respondent chooses not to file such a motion, he shall immediately notify the Court and Petitioner, and the Court will enter an order governing the merits briefing of those claims. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (st)
March 31, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 318 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 275 Petitioner's Motion for Evidentiary Hearing; granting 312 Petitioner's Motion for Leave to File an Overlength Reply Brief; granting 315 Petitioner's Motion to Seal. Appendix 17 to Petitio ners Reply in Support of Motion for Evidentiary Hearing (Dkt. 314 ) shall remain SEALED. Petitioner shall file an amended brief on the merits of his non-defaulted claims within 90 days after entry of this Order. Petitioners merits brief shall not ex ceed 100 pages in length. Within 90 days after service of Petitioners amended merits brief, Respondent shall file an amended answering brief on the merits. The answering brief shall not exceed 100 pages in length. Within 30 days after service of Resp ondents amended answering brief, Petitioner shall file an amended reply brief on the merits. The reply brief shall not exceed 50 pages in length. Any brief filed by either party throughout the remainder of this litigation must contain separate sectio ns for each habeas claim discussed, and each section heading shall specify which particular claim is addressed in that particular section of the brief. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Idaho District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Fields v. Blades
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Zane Jack Fields
Represented By: Dennis Benjamin(Designation CJA Appointment)
Represented By: Bruce D Livingston(Designation Public Defender or Community Defender Appointment)
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Randy Blades
Represented By: L LaMont Anderson
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 [ 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?