Beavers v. Little
Mark D Beavers |
Steve Little |
1:2016cv00026 |
January 15, 2016 |
US District Court for the District of Idaho |
Boise - Southern Office |
Ada - Southern |
Edward J. Lodge |
General |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 67 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Dkt. 3 ) is DENIED and DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Judge David C. Nye. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (jp) |
Filing 59 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER. IT IS ORDERED: Petitioners Motion to Reconsider Appointment of Counsel (Dkt. 35) is DENIED. Petitioners Motion for Discovery (Dkt. 37 ) is DENIED. Petitioners Motion to Expand the Record (Dkt. 45) is GRANTED, only for procedural default purposes. Petitioners and Respondents Motions for Extensions of Time (Dkts. 36 , 47 , 48 , 51 , 52 ) are GRANTED.Petitioners Motion to Apply the Martinez v. Ryan Exception (Dkt. 44 ) isDENIED. Petitioners Motion for Status (D kt. 57 ) is GRANTED with the entry of this Order. Petitioner may file a reply to the merits discussion on the remaining claims (1 and 12) found in Respondents Response and Brief in Support of Dismissal (Dkt. 28 ) within 30 days after entry of this Order. Respondent may file a sur-reply within 14 days after Petitioners reply. Nothing further shall be filed thereafter until the Court addresses the merits of the remaining claims. Signed by Judge David C. Nye. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (km) |
Filing 21 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting 19 Respondent's Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply; granting in part and denying in part 13 Respondent's Motion for Summary Dismissal. The Reply filed at Docket No. 20 is considered timel y. Petitioner may file a motion for application of Martinez v. Ryan regarding only his ineffective assistance of trial counsel claims no later than 60 days after entry of this Order. Respondent shall file an answer addressing Claims 1 and 12 w ithin 90 days afterentry of this Order. Petitioner shall file a reply (formerly called a traverse), containing a brief rebutting Respondents answer and brief, which shall be filed and served within 30 days after service of the answer. Respondent has the option of filing a sur-reply within 14 days after service of the reply. At that point, the case shall be deemed ready for a final decision. 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) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Beavers v. Little | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Mark D Beavers | |
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 ] |
Defendant: Steve Little | |
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.