Thomas v. Shinn
Petitioner: Anthony Allen Thomas
Respondent: David Shinn and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Case Number: 2:2022cv01327
Filed: August 8, 2022
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Presiding Judge: James F Metcalf (PS)
Referring Judge: James F Metcalf
2 Judge: Roslyn O Silver
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 13, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 16, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 10 SCHEDULING ORDER: This matter was recently assigned to the undersigned for preparation of a report and recommendation. To facilitate the resolution of this matter, the Court will adopt a schedule and make orders concerning the filings in this matter. (See Order for details.) Signed by Magistrate Judge James F Metcalf on 9/16/22. (SST)
September 15, 2022 Filing 9 NOTICE of Errata re: #8 Notice of Appearance/Association of Counsel by Respondents Attorney General of the State of Arizona, David Shinn.. (Claw, Gracynthia)
September 15, 2022 Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Gracynthia Claw on behalf of Attorney General of the State of Arizona, David Shinn. (Claw, Gracynthia)
September 15, 2022 Filing 7 Notice of Receipt of Electronic Service of Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Arizona Attorney General on 09/14/22. 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)
September 14, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 Arizona Attorney General Service Order (2254): Ground One of the Amended Petition (Doc. #4 ) is dismissed. Respondents must answer Ground Two. The Clerk of Court must serve a copy of the Amended Petition (Doc. #4 ) 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 James F. Metcalf 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 full details.) Signed by Senior Judge Roslyn O Silver on 9/14/22. (Attachments: #1 Amended 2254 Petition) (SST)
September 6, 2022 Filing 5 Filing fee: $5.00, receipt number 200001489. PAID IN FULL. (BAS)
September 1, 2022 Filing 4 AMENDED PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254) filed by Anthony Allen Thomas.(CLM) (11 pages)
August 16, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER: 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. 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. Petitioner's "Special Action" (Doc. #1 ), which the Court construes as a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254, is dismissed with leave to amend. Petitioner has 30 days from the date of filing of this Order to file an amended 2254 petition in compliance with this Order. If Petitioner fails to file an amended petition 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. The Clerk of Court must mail 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)" and the current court-approved form for filing an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Habeas). (See Order for full details.) Signed by Senior Judge Roslyn O Silver on 8/16/22. (SST)
August 8, 2022 Filing 2 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT (REK)
August 8, 2022 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254) filed by Anthony Allen Thomas. (5 Pages and Envelope) (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (REK)

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 this case: Thomas v. Shinn
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Anthony Allen Thomas
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: David Shinn
Represented By: Gracynthia Claw
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: Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Represented By: Gracynthia Claw
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?