Rogers v. New Hampshire, State of
Scott N. Rogers |
New Hampshire, State of |
NH Attorney General - Notice Only - HC (Court Use Only) and NH Department of Corrections - Notice Only - HC (Court Use Only) |
1:2013fp00322 |
July 29, 2013 |
US District Court for the District of New Hampshire |
Concord Office |
Joseph N. Laplante |
Landya B. McCafferty |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 48 ORDER denying 45 Motion for Reconsideration; denying 46 Motion for Reconsideration; denying 47 Motion for Production of Records and Other Relief. So Ordered by Judge Landya B. McCafferty.(gla) |
Filing 43 ORDER approving 39 Report and Recommendation. So Ordered by Judge Landya B. McCafferty.(ko) |
Filing 24 ORDER denying without prejudice 17 Motion for Hearing; denying without prejudice 18 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Respondent is directed to file a transcript of the November 10, 2009, motions hearing; and an unredacted copy of the appendix to the direct appeal of Respondent's criminal conviction, as outlined in this order. So Ordered by District Judge Landya B. McCafferty.(gla) |
Filing 11 ORDER - The clerk's office is ordered to serve the respondent as provided in the Agreement on Acceptance of Service. The respondent shall answer or otherwise plead within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. So Ordered by District Judge Landya B. McCafferty.(ko) |
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 New Hampshire 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.