Santana v. LeGrand et al
| Vincent Mark Santana |
| Robert LeGrand and Nevada Attorney General |
| 3:2015cv00434 |
| August 24, 2015 |
| 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
8
ORDERED that the clerk of the court shall file the petition, which currently is attached to a notice (# 1 ). The # 6 motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. Clerk shall add Adam Paul Laxalt, AG, as counsel for respondents. Clerk shall electr onically serve respondents with a copy of the petition and a copy of this order. ( E-service to AG on 1/6/2016. ) No response by respondents is necessary. Clerk of the court shall refer this action to the United States Court of Appeals for the N inth Circuit. ( E-mail notice (NEF) sent to the US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, on 1/6/2016. ) Clerk of the court shall administratively close this action. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 1/5/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
|
|
Filing
3
ORDER directing Petitioner within 30 days to either file an IFP application or pay $5 filing fee; directing Clerk to send Petitioner IFP form (mailed 10/29/2015). Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 10/28/2015. (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
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.
