McInerney v. Helling et al
| Michael McInerney |
| Donald Helling and Nevada Attorney General |
| 3:2007cv00037 |
| January 24, 2007 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Reno Office |
| Washoe |
| Larry R. Hicks |
| Robert A. McQuaid |
| 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
48
ORDER granting in part 40 petitioner's Motion for Certificate of Appealability on the following issues: (1) Whether the court was correct in its ruling that trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance by not moving for a second compe tency hearing before trial; and (2) whether the court was correct in its ruling that trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance by not investigating petitioner's mental health and psychiatric history at the time of petitioner's at tack upon Edwin Hickman. E-mail notice (NEF) sent to the US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Granting 43 petitioner's Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal. E-mail notice (NEF) sent to the US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 6/22/09. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SL)
|
|
Filing
38
JUDGMENT. IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the 8 Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED. Signed by Lance S. Wilson on 3/25/2009. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - PM)
|
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 Nevada 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.
