Carmichael v. Davenport et al (INMATE 2)
||Leon Carmichael, Jr.
||Luther Strange, Carter Davenport and State of Alabama
||February 14, 2012
||US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama
||Truman M. Hobbs
||Susan Russ Walker
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28 U.S.C. § 2254
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|May 21, 2014
OPINION AND ORDER: It is ORDERED that the 27 Motion filed by Leon Carmichael, Jr., for an Extension of Time in which to file a "C.O.A." is granted to the following extent: (1) The motion is treated as a notice of appeal pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a), and is deemed timely filed. (2) Petitioner Carmichael is given until 8/19/2014, to set forth why the court should grant a certificate of appealability as to some or all of the issues in this case, that is, why the court should find petitioner Carmichael "has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right" as to particular issues. 28 U. S. C. 2253(c)(2). (3) If petitioner Carmichael seeks to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, he is given until 8/1 9/2014, to set forth further why the court should find that his appeal is being "taken in good faith", 28 § U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that is, why the court should not find that the appeal is frivolous, Coppedge v. United States, 369 U .S. 438, 445 (1962), or has no substantive merit. United States v. Bottoson, 644 F.2d 1174, 1176 (5th Cir.Unit B May 15, 1981) (per curiam); otherwise, he should pay the appellant filing fee (& 505.00) by then. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 5/21/2014. (dmn, )
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 Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?