Sheppard v. Shinn et al
| Rodney Sheppard |
| David Shinn and Attorney General of the State of Arizona |
| 2:2020cv01264 |
| June 26, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| John Z Boyle (PS) |
| John Z Boyle |
| John J Tuchi |
| Prisoner: Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 7, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Attorney Substitution by Nicholas Chapman-Hushek. (Chapman-Hushek, Nicholas) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Jim D Nielsen on behalf of Attorney General of the State of Arizona, David Shinn. (Nielsen, Jim) |
| Filing 7 Notice of Receipt of Electronic Service of Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Arizona Attorney General on 08/05/20. The Attorney General's Office will file a Notice of Appearance within five (5) business days that identifies the respondents that are represented or, in the alternative, will notify the Court if the Attorney General is not able to accept service for and/or represent any of the named respondents. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (Nielsen, Jim) |
Filing 6
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED: The Clerk of Court must serve a copy of the First Amended Petition (Doc. #5 ) and this Order on the Respondent(s) and the Attorney General of the State of Arizona by electronic mail pursuant to Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, and the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States District Clerk of Court for the District of Arizona and the Arizona Attorney General's Office. Respondents must answer the First Amended Petition within 40 days of the date of service. Respondents must not file a dispositive motion in place of an answer. Petitioner may file a reply within 30 days from the date of service of the answer. This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle pursuant to Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for further proceedings and a report and recommendation. See document for complete details. Signed by Judge John J Tuchi on 8/4/2020. (Attachments: #1 Amended Petition doc. 5)(WLP) *Modified to correct docket text on 8/7/2020 (CEI).
|
| Filing 5 FIRST AMENDED PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254) filed by Rodney Sheppard. (57 pages) (WLP) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED: (1) Petitioner's Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. #2 ) is granted. (2) Petitioners Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. #1 ) is dismissed without prejudice, with leave to amend. Petitioner has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file an amended petition. (3) The Clerk of Court must enter a judgment of dismissal without prejudice of this action, without further notice to Petitioner, if Petitioner fails to submit an amended petition on the court-approved form within 30 days from the filing date of this Order and deny any pending unrelated motions as moot. (4) The Clerk of Court must send Petitioner the current court-approved form for filing a "Petition Under 28 U.S.C. 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (Non-Death Penalty)." See document for complete details. Signed by Judge John J Tuchi on 7/2/2020. (WLP)
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT (WLP) |
| Filing 2 APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Rodney Sheppard. (WLP) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254) filed by Rodney Sheppard. (Attachments: #1 Supplementing Brief, #2 Envelope)(WLP) |
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 Arizona 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.
