Thompson v. Walker et al
| Richard Lee Thompson |
| Sandra Walker and Attorney General of the State of Arizona |
| 3:2011cv08001 |
| January 3, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Prescott Division Office |
| Pima |
| Edward C Voss (PS) |
| David G Campbell |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
8
ORDER that Petitioner's 4 Motion For 30[-]Day Extension Of Time Of 28 U.S.C. 2254 And Civil Suit 42 U[.]S[.]C[.] 1983 is denied as moot. Petitioner's 5 Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is granted. The 1 Petition is dismissed w ithout prejudice, with leave to amend. Petitioner has 30 days from the filing date of this Order to amend his original Petition to show how he is being held in custody in violation of the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States, to specif y all the exhausted grounds for relief which are available to him, to set forth in summary form the facts supporting each of his grounds, and to provide information as to how he has first exhausted his state court remedies as to each ground on which he requests action by this Court. The Clerk of Court must enter a judgment of dismissal of this action without prejudice, without further notice to Petitioner, if Petitioner fails to file an amended petition within 30 days from the filing date of this Order. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 04/05/11. (ESL)
|
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.
