Hazelwood v. Skolinik et al
| Shaquille E. Hazelwood |
| Nevada Attorney General and Howard Skolinik |
| 3:2014cv00022 |
| January 13, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Reno Office |
| William G. Cobb |
| Larry R. Hicks |
| 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
61
ORDER that the First Amended Petition (ECF No. 18 ) is DENIED; Hazelwood is denied a certificate of appealability; Clerk directed to substitute Jerry Howell for Howard Skolnik as the Respondent warden on the docket for this case; Clerk directed to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 10/23/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)
|
|
Filing
58
ORDER granting ECF No. 57 Motion to Extend Time to file a reply to ECF No. 51 Answer to Amended Habeas Petition. Reply due by 3/7/2018. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 2/9/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)
|
|
Filing
55
ORDER granting ECF No. 54 Motion to Extend Time : Petitioner's Reply to ECF No. 51 Answer due by 2/5/2018. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 12/4/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
|
|
Filing
38
ORDERED that respondents' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 26 ) is GRANTED. Ground 1(A)(1) is DISMISSED with prejudice as procedurally defaulted. FURTHER ORDERED answer due by 9/23/2016; reply due 45 days from service of answer. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 8/8/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER directing respondents to answer or otherwise respond to 18 amended petition within 45 days. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 7/10/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER directing Clerk to file the petition and motion for appointment of counsel; granting the motion for appointment of counsel; provisionally appointing the FPD to represent petitioner. The FPD shall have 30 days to undertake direct representation or indicate his inability to do so. If the FPD does undertake representation, he shall then have 60 days to file an amended petition. The Clerk shall add Catherine Cortez Masto as counsel for respondents and shall e-serve both the NV AG and FPD a copy of the petition and a copy of this order (NEFs sent 8/5/2014). Respondents' counsel shall enter a notice of appearance within 20 days but no further response is required from them until further court order. Any exhibits shall be filed with separate index. Hard copies of any exhibits shall be forwarded, for this case, to staff attorneys in Las Vegas. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 8/4/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER re 7 , 8 , and 9 letters requesting status. This action will be screened and processed in the usual order, which will take considerable time. No further letters are necessary. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 6/25/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER directing Petitioner to submit an application to proceed IFP or pay the $5 filing fee within 30 days (due 2/14/2014). The clerk shall send form to Petitioner (mailed 1/15/2014). Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 01/14/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)
|
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.
