Schult v. Attorney General of the State of Nevada
| David K. Shult |
| Attorney General of the State of Nevada |
| 3:2015cv00389 |
| July 28, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Reno Office |
| Valerie P. Cooke |
| Howard D. McKibben |
| 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
33
ORDERED that the petition for writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 6 ) is DENIED. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 31 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Howard D. McKibben on 2/13/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDERED that respondents' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 13 ) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The portion of Ground Two alleging a violation of petitioner's rights arising from the State's use of a preliminary hearing instead of a grand jury is denied on the merits. Ground Two is otherwise exhausted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall have 45 days from the date of entry of this order to file an answer to Ground Two. Petitioner shall thereafter have 30 days within which to file a reply. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 10 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Howard D. McKibben on 7/11/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
|
|
Filing
7
ORDER Grounds One, Three, Four, Five, Six and Seven are dismissed. Clerk shall add AG as counsel for respondents and serve upon respondents copy of 6 petition and copy of this order (served via NEF 10/22/2015). Respondents shall hav e 60 days to answer or otherwise respond. Hard copy of additional state court records shall be forwarded to staff attorneys in Reno. "Motion Seeking United States Justice & Jurisdiction on Writ of Habeas Corpus (Post-Conviction)" 3 is denied as moot. Please see attached for further details/deadlines. Signed by Judge Howard D. McKibben on 10/22/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)
|
|
Filing
5
ORDER denying 2 IFP application; directing Petitioner to file a habeas petition on the court-approved form within 30 days; directing the Clerk to send petitioner 2254 form and instructions (mailed 8/12/2015). Signed by Judge Howard D. McKibben on 8/12/2015. (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
| Search for this case: Schult v. Attorney General of the State of Nevada | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: Attorney General of the State of Nevada | |
| 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: David K. Shult | |
| 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.
