In re: Wyatt
| In re: CARL DEAN WYATT, JR. |
| SCOTT CROW |
| 25-6118 |
| July 29, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 22, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 2
[2] Denied. Terminated on the merits after submissions without oral hearing. Written, unsigned, unpublished; Final order filed by Judges Tymkovich, Phillips and Moritz denying Mr. Wyatt's motion for authorization to file a successive 2254 petition. [25-6118] [Entered: 08/22/2025 10:03 AM]
|
| Filing 1 [11201115] Case docketed. Petition for permission to file successive 2254 habeas petition in district court. DATE RECEIVED: 07/29/2025. [25-6118] [Entered: 07/29/2025 02:56 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: In re: Wyatt | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: In re: CARL DEAN WYATT, JR. | |
| Represented By: | Carl Dean Wyatt Jr. |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: SCOTT CROW | |
| 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 | [ 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.
