Smith v. Perez et al
| 1:2005cv00167 |
| March 14, 2005 |
| US District Court for the Western District of New York |
| Buffalo Office |
| Victor E. Bianchini |
| 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
17
DECISION AND ORDER. Petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED. Because the Court finds that Petitioner has not made a "substantial showing," 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), of the denial of a constitutional right, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. Signed by Hon. Victor E. Bianchini on 6/29/2010. (SDW)
|
|
Filing
16
ORDER. The Court requests respondent search her files and provide to the Court (1) copies of the C.P.L. § 440.30 motion papers and exhibits submitted by both parties, and (2) all related orders issued in connection with the C.P.L. § 440.30 motion. The Court asks that respondent respond to this Order within thirty (30) days, with copies of his response and related documents also provided to petitioner. Signed by Hon. Victor E. Bianchini on 3/15/2010. (SDW)
|
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 York Western 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: Smith v. Perez et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
