Brooks v. Carter et al (INMATE 4)
| James Brooks Walter and Walter James Brooks |
| Karen Carter and Steven T. Marshall |
| 3:2022cv00687 |
| December 5, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Charles S Coody |
| William Keith Watkins |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 4, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
ORDER: it is ORDERED that by 1/27/2023, Petitioner must show cause why his 2254 petition should not be dismissed because it was not filed within the one-year limitation period in 28 USC 2244(d) and for the other reasons asserted by Respondents, as further set out in order. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 1/6/2023. (bes, )
|
| Filing 12 ANSWER to Complaint by Karen Carter, Steven T. Marshall. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Case Action Summary, 43-CC-2019-000123.00, #2 Exhibit B - Guilty plea, 43-CC-2019-000123.00, #3 Exhibit C - Order of probation, 43-CC-2019-000123.00, #4 Exhibit D - Delinquency report, 43-CC-2019-000123.00, #5 Exhibit E - Order revoking probation, 43-CC-2019-000123.70, #6 Exhibit F - Order revoking probation, 43-CC-2019-000123.71)(Rogan, Sara) |
|
Filing 11
ORDER: it is ORDERED that Petitioner's #7 second Application to Proceed IFP filed in this action be DENIED as Moot. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 12/29/2022. (bes, )
|
| Filing 10 AO FORM 85 sent to counsel for Karen Carter, Steven T. Marshall. NOTICE TO COUNSEL: If the parties wish to consent to the jurisdiction of a US Magistrate Judge, counsel is required to print, sign and mail this form to all parties/counsel in this case. This form should not be returned to the Clerk's Office unless all parties have consented. (bes, ) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Sara Delene Rogan on behalf of Karen Carter, Steven T. Marshall (Rogan, Sara) |
| Filing 8 Corporate/Conflict Disclosure Statement by Karen Carter, Steven T. Marshall. (Rogan, Sara) |
| Filing 7 Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit by Walter James Brooks. (bes, ) |
| Filing 6 Return Receipt Card showing service of #1 Petition & #4 Order signed by Sandra B. for Steven T. Marshall served on 12/16/2022, answer due 1/5/2023. (bes, ) |
| Filing 5 Return Receipt Card showing service of #1 Petition & #4 Order signed by Sharon Blakely for Karen Carter served on 12/15/2022, answer due 1/5/2023. (bes, ) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER: the Petitioner's #3 Application to Proceed without Prepayment of Fees is GRANTED; ORDER TO ANSWER habeas petition on or before 1/5/2023; Copy mailed to petitioner; mailed CMRRR w/copies of petition to Warden & Attorney General for the State of Alabama. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 12/14/2022. (bes, )
|
| Filing 3 Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit by Walter James Brooks. (bes, ) |
|
Filing 2
ORDER: it is ORDERED that by 12/20/2022, Brooks shall either submit the $5.00 filing fee or file the appropriate affidavit supporting a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis; The Clerk is DIRECTED to SEND Brooks a form for use in filing a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 12/6/2022. (bes, )
|
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Walter James Brooks. (NO IFP; NO FILING FEE)(tls, ) Modified on 12/6/2022 to correct PLF name (bes, ). |
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 Alabama Middle 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.
