Haver v. Shinn et al
| Terry Lee Haver |
| David Shinn and Attorney General of the State of Arizona |
| 2:2020cv01414 |
| July 16, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Camille D Bibles (PS) |
| Camille D Bibles |
| Michael T Liburdi |
| Prisoner: Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 27, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 Notice of Receipt of Electronic Service of Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Arizona Attorney General on 9/29/20. 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 7
ORDER: The Clerk of Court must serve a copy of the Amended Petition (Doc. #6 ) 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. This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Camille D. Bibles pursuant to Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for further proceedings and a report and recommendation. (See Order for further details.) Signed by Judge Michael T Liburdi on 9/29/20. (Attachments: #1 Amended Petition Part 1, #2 Amended Petition Part 2) (SST)
|
| Filing 6 AMENDED PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254) filed by Terry Lee Haver. (Attachments: #1 Part 2)(SLQ) (60 pages). |
|
Filing 5
ORDER - Petitioner's 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. 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. (See document for complete details). Signed by Judge Michael T Liburdi on 8/26/20. (SLQ)
|
| Filing 4 Filing fee: $5.00, receipt number PHX221773. (REK) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED: (1) Within 30 days of the date this Order is filed, Petitioner must either pay the $5.00 filing fee or file a complete Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. (2) If Petitioner fails to either pay the $5.00 filing fee or file a complete Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis within 30 days, the Clerk of Court must enter a judgment of dismissal of this action without prejudice and without further notice to Petitioner and deny any pending unrelated motions as moot. (3) The Clerk of Court must mail Petitioner a court-approved form for filing an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Habeas). See document for complete details. Signed by Judge Michael T Liburdi on 7/23/2020. (WLP)
|
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT (WLP) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254) filed by Terry Lee Haver. (65 pages) (Attachments: #1 Petition part 2, #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.
