Moore v. Baca et al
Petitioner: Donn Richard Moore
Respondent: I. Baca and Nevada Attorney General
Case Number: 3:2015cv00101
Filed: February 17, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Nevada
Office: Reno Office
Presiding Judge: William G. Cobb
Presiding Judge: Robert C. Jones
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
August 22, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 25 ORDER granting ECF No. 24 Respondents' Motion to Dismiss; petitioner's Amended Habeas Petition ECF No. 19 is DISMISSED with prejudice; Clerk directed to enter judgment accordingly and closed this case; a certificate of appealability is DENIED. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 08/22/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)
December 12, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 23 ORDER - Answer/response to amended petition (ECF No. 19 ) due by 2/10/2017. Reply due 30 days after service of answer. Any state court exhibits shall be filed with index as specified herein, and copy forwarded to staff attorneys in Reno. ECF No. 20 Motion for counsel is DENIED. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 12/12/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
September 16, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDERED that Rs' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 12 ) is GRANTED. The habeas petition (ECF No. 6 ) is DISMISSED with leave to amend. Amended petition due by 10/16/2016. Clerk shall send P a 2254 habeas petition form, instructions, and a copy o f his dismissed habeas petition (i.e., ECF No. 6 ). (Form, instructions, and copy of petition mailed to P 9/16/2016.) Rs' motions for extension of time (ECF Nos. 8 and 9 ) are GRANTED nunc pro tunc as of their respective filing dates. P's "motion for summary judgment" (ECF No. 10 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 9/16/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
June 1, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER directing Clerk to file petition and e-serve it on respondents (NEF sent 6/2/2015). Respondents to respond to petition within 90 days; petitioner to reply within 30 days thereafter. Additional exhibits to be filed with separate index. Hard copies of any exhibits shall be forwarded, for this case, to staff attorneys in Reno. (See order for further details.) Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 6/1/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)
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 Nevada District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Moore v. Baca et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: I. Baca
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 ]
Respondent: Nevada Attorney General
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: Donn Richard Moore
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?