MOSES, et al v. POLK

MOSES, et al v. POLK

Petitioner:	ERROL DUKE MOSES
Respondent:	MARVIN POLK
Case Number:	1:2003cv00910
Filed:	September 24, 2003
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Office:	NCMD Office
County:	Forsyth
Presiding Judge:	L. PATRICK AULD
Presiding Judge:	THOMAS D. SCHROEDER
Nature of Suit:	Death Penalty
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
February 13, 2015	Filing 90 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 2/13/2015, RECOMMENDED that Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment (Docket Entry 85 ) be denied, without issuance of a certificate of appealability. (Butler, Carol)
July 17, 2012	Filing 66 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 07/17/2012. RECOMMENDED that: (1) Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment (Docket Entry 58 ) be construed as a Successive Pet ition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254; and (2) Petitioner's Motion be TRANSFERRED to the United States Court of Appeals for Fourth Circuit for a determination of the propriety of pre-filing authorization. (3) Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Docket Entry 60 ) be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to re-filing should the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals deny pre-filing authorization. (Butler, Carol)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 13, 2015

Filing 90 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 2/13/2015, RECOMMENDED that Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment (Docket Entry 85 ) be denied, without issuance of a certificate of appealability. (Butler, Carol)

July 17, 2012

Filing 66 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 07/17/2012. RECOMMENDED that: (1) Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment (Docket Entry 58 ) be construed as a Successive Pet ition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254; and (2) Petitioner's Motion be TRANSFERRED to the United States Court of Appeals for Fourth Circuit for a determination of the propriety of pre-filing authorization. (3) Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Docket Entry 60 ) be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to re-filing should the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals deny pre-filing authorization. (Butler, Carol)

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 North Carolina Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: MOSES, et al v. POLK
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: ERROL DUKE MOSES
Represented By:	SHELAGH KENNEY(Designation CJA Appointment)
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: MARVIN POLK
Represented By:	STEVEN M. ARBOGAST
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?