Armfield v. Williams

Armfield v. Williams

Petitioner:	RUSSELL ARMFIELD
Respondent:	TARRY WILLIAMS, Warden, Dixon Correctional Center
Case Number:	22-1263
Filed:	April 8, 2022
Court:	U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit
Nature of Suit:	Other

RSS Track this Docket

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 12, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed	Document Text
April 12, 2022	ORDER to Show Cause entered. Petitioner Russell Armfield has filed an application for leave to file a second or successive habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. 2254 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2244(b). Petitioner is directed to show cause in writing within thirty (30) days as to why the application should not transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1631 (allowing court to transfer action in the interest of justice if it finds there is want of jurisdiction). See 28 U.S.C. 2244(b)(3)(a) (requiring applicant to move in the appropriate court of appeals). Petitioner's failure to respond in writing within thirty (30) days may result in denial of the application. [22-1263] (GB) [Entered: 04/12/2022 03:45 PM]
April 8, 2022	ORIGINAL PROCEEDING docketed. Application for permission to file a second or successive habeas corpus petition filed by Petitioner Russell Armfield. [22-1263]. CLERK'S NOTE: Electronic access to document containing one or more personal identifiers was restricted by the clerk's office. (GB) [Entered: 04/08/2022 04:00 PM]

Date Filed

Document Text

April 12, 2022

ORDER to Show Cause entered. Petitioner Russell Armfield has filed an application for leave to file a second or successive habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. 2254 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2244(b). Petitioner is directed to show cause in writing within thirty (30) days as to why the application should not transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1631 (allowing court to transfer action in the interest of justice if it finds there is want of jurisdiction). See 28 U.S.C. 2244(b)(3)(a) (requiring applicant to move in the appropriate court of appeals). Petitioner's failure to respond in writing within thirty (30) days may result in denial of the application. [22-1263] (GB) [Entered: 04/12/2022 03:45 PM]

April 8, 2022

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING docketed. Application for permission to file a second or successive habeas corpus petition filed by Petitioner Russell Armfield. [22-1263]. CLERK'S NOTE: Electronic access to document containing one or more personal identifiers was restricted by the clerk's office. (GB) [Entered: 04/08/2022 04:00 PM]

Access additional case information on PACER

Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Search for this case: Armfield v. Williams
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: RUSSELL ARMFIELD
Represented By:	Russell Armfield
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: TARRY WILLIAMS, Warden, Dixon Correctional Center
Represented By:	Kwame Raoul
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?