Bowles v. Baca et al
Petitioner: Travis Bowles
Respondent: Isidro Baca and Nevada Attorney General
Unknown: Adam P. Laxalt
Case Number: 3:2018cv00272
Filed: June 11, 2018
Court: US District Court for the District of Nevada
Office: Reno Office
Presiding Judge: William G. Cobb
Presiding Judge: Miranda M. Du
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
December 9, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 36 ORDER - Petitioner's Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 4 ) is denied.Petitioner is denied a certificate of appealability.Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by Chief Judge Miranda M. Du on 12/9/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AB)
August 12, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 28 ORDERED that Grounds 4, in part, 7(2), 7(3), 7(4), 7(5), 8 and 9 are dismissed without prejudice as unexhausted and by Petitioner's request. Answer to the remaining claims of the petition is due by 10/11/2019. Reply due 30 days thereafter. Any state court record exhibits must be filed with a separate index as specified herein. A paper copy of any exhibits over 50 pages must be bound and delivered to "Staff Attorney" in Las Vegas. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
July 24, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER that ECF No. 26 Petitioner Travis Bowles's copy request is granted; Clerk instructed to mail petitioner one copy of the the July 9, 2018 Order (ECF No. 3 ) and the current docket sheet (Mailed to P on 7/24/2019). Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 7/24/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)
July 3, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER denying Petitioner's ECF No. 21 Motion to Vacate; giving Petitioner 15 days to make an election as set forth in the Court's ECF No. 20 Order. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 7/3/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)
May 16, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 20 ORDER -- Respondents' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 13 ) is granted in part and denied in part as specified herein. By 6/15/2019 Petitioner must file either motion to dismiss unexhausted claims, a motion to dismiss entire petition to return to state court, or a motion for other appropriate relief including stay and abeyance. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 5/16/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
November 7, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER that Respondents' second motion for enlargement of time (ECF No. 11 ) is granted. Respondents will have until December 9, 2018, to file a response to the petition for writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 4 ) in this case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 11/7/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)
September 10, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER granting ECF No. 9 Motion for Enlargement of Time to file Response to ECF No. 4 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Respondents response/answer due 11/9/2018. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 9/10/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)
July 9, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER that Petitioner's IFP application (ECF No. 1 ) is granted; petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 1 -5) is denied; petitioner's motion for leave to add additional grounds (ECF No. 1 -3) is de nied as moot; petitioner's motion to extend prison copywork limit (ECF No. 1 -4) is denied without prejudice; Clerk directed to file the petition (ECF No. 1 -1) (mailed a copy to P on 7/9/2018); Clerk directed to add NV AG as counsel for respondents; respondents to file a response to the petition by 9/7/2018; any additional state court record exhibits filed herein; counsel shall send a hard copy of all exhibits filed, for this case, to the Reno Clerk's Off ice; petitioner shall have 30 days from service of the answer, motion to dismiss, or other response to mail a reply or response to the Clerk of Court for filing. See Order for further details and instructions. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 7/9/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH) Modified on 7/9/2018 to reflect petition mailed to P (LH).
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: Bowles 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: Isidro Baca
Represented By: Amanda C Sage
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
Represented By: Amanda C Sage
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 ]
Unknown: Adam P. Laxalt
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: Travis Bowles
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?