Huitran-Barron v. USA

Huitran-Barron v. USA

Petitioner:	Bulmaro Huitran-Barron
Respondent:	USA
Case Number:	4:2017cv00299
Filed:	July 17, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the District of Idaho
Office:	Pocatello - Eastern Office
County:	Bonneville - Eastern
Presiding Judge:	David C. Nye
Nature of Suit:	Motions to Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2255
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
October 2, 2019	Filing 20 ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL - IT IS ORDERED that: (1) Defendant shall be represented by counsel at the October 30, 2019 evidentiary hearing. (2) The Clerk is directed to locate CJA counsel, who will represent defendant at the evidentiary hearing only. 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 (jd)
November 13, 2018	Filing 16 MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER As to ground one stated in Huitran-Barron's § 2255 motion (Dkt. 1; Cr. Dkt. 36) the government shall advise the Court within 20 days how it would like to proceed. As to grounds two and three, the § 2255 moti on (Dkt. 1; Cr. Dkt. 36), Petitioner's motion (Dkt. 1) is DENIED and the government's motion to dismiss (Dkt. 12) is GRANTED, and, accordingly, the claims asserted in those grounds are DISMISSED. Huitran-Barron's Motion for Permission to Amend his § 2255 (Dkt. 15) is DENIED. 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 (jp)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 2, 2019

Filing 20 ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL - IT IS ORDERED that: (1) Defendant shall be represented by counsel at the October 30, 2019 evidentiary hearing. (2) The Clerk is directed to locate CJA counsel, who will represent defendant at the evidentiary hearing only. 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 (jd)

November 13, 2018

Filing 16 MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER As to ground one stated in Huitran-Barron's § 2255 motion (Dkt. 1; Cr. Dkt. 36) the government shall advise the Court within 20 days how it would like to proceed. As to grounds two and three, the § 2255 moti on (Dkt. 1; Cr. Dkt. 36), Petitioner's motion (Dkt. 1) is DENIED and the government's motion to dismiss (Dkt. 12) is GRANTED, and, accordingly, the claims asserted in those grounds are DISMISSED. Huitran-Barron's Motion for Permission to Amend his § 2255 (Dkt. 15) is DENIED. 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 (jp)

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: Huitran-Barron v. USA
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: USA
Represented By:	Michael Joseph Fica
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 ]
Petitioner: Bulmaro Huitran-Barron
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.

Why Is My Information Online?