Sanchez v. United States of America
| Marcos Sanchez |
| United States of America |
| 1:2015cv01188 |
| October 23, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of New Mexico |
| Albuquerque Office |
| -OUT OF STATE- |
| James O. Browning |
| Stephan M. Vidmar |
| Motions to Vacate Sentence |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 |
| 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
23
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by District Judge James O. Browning. (kw)
|
|
Filing
21
STIPULATED ORDER by Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar GRANTING 20 Mr. Sanchez's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Object to 17 PF&RD. Objections are due no later than January 27, 2017. (sg)
|
|
Filing
19
STIPULATED ORDER by Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar GRANTING 18 Mr. Sanchez's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Object to 17 PF&RD. Objections are due no later than January 20, 2017. (am)
|
|
Filing
17
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION by Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar to DENY 1 Defendant Sanchez's Motion and 7 Amended Motion under Section 2255. Objections to PF&RD are due by January 6, 2017. Add 3 d ays to the deadline if service is by mailing it to the person's last known address (or means described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(D) and (F)); if service is by electronic means, no additional days are added. (Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d); Fed. R. Crim. P. 45(c).) (sg)
|
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 Mexico 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.
