Rankin v. Norris

Case Number: 5:2006cv00228
Filed: September 5, 2006
Court: Arkansas Eastern District Court
Office: Pine Bluff Office
Presiding Judge: James M Moody
Nature of Suit: Death Penalty - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
December 11, 2009 80 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 77 MOTION to Reopen Case Motion to Temporarily Reopen Proceedings for the Limited Purpose of Preserving Testimony under Fed. R. Civ. P. 27 filed by Roderick Leshun Rankin; and directing the parties to agree upon a time and place for the proposed deposition; once deposition is completed, petitioner shall notify the Court and make the deposition part of the record. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 12/11/09. (bkp)
July 8, 2009 62 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 46 Motion to Stay and denying petitioner's motion for evidentiary hearing on his mental retardation claim. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 7/8/09. (bkp)
November 25, 2008 51 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER re 46 MOTION to Stay directing petitioner to file, within 60 days of the entry date of this Order, a statement of exhausted and unexhausted claims and directing the respondent to file its response within 45 days of petitioner's pleading. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 11/25/08. (bkp)

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 Arkansas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Rankin v. Norris
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ 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?