Bacari McCarthren, et al v. USA
| BACARI MCCARTHREN |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| 22-13449 |
| October 13, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Prisoner Petitions -Vacate Sentence |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 21, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 Appellant's AMENDED Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Bacari McCarthren. [Entered: 11/22/2022 11:17 AM] |
| Filing 8 TRANSCRIPT INFORMATION form filed by Party Bacari McCarthren. No hearings. [Entered: 11/08/2022 02:43 PM] |
| Filing 7 Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Bacari McCarthren. [Entered: 11/08/2022 02:40 PM] |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF CIP FILING DEFICIENCY to Bacari McCarthren. You are receiving this notice because you have not completed the Certificate of Interested Persons (CIP). Failure to comply with 11th Cir. Rules 26.1-1 through 26.1-4 may result in dismissal of the case or appeal under 11th Cir. R. 42-1(b), return of deficient documents without action, or other sanctions on counsel, the party, or both. If you are an appellant or petitioner, upon expiration of 14 days from the date of this notice, your appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution if the default has not been remedied, pursuant to 11th Cir. Rules 26.1-5(c) and 42-1(b). If you are an appellee or respondent, no action will be taken on documents submitted until the CIP deficiency is remedied. See 11th Cir. R. 26.1-5. [Entered: 11/04/2022 10:48 AM] |
| Filing 5 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney Stuart E. Walker for Appellee USA. On the same day the CIP is served, any filer represented by counsel must also complete the court's web-based stock ticker symbol certificate at the link here http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/web-based-cip or on the court's website. See 11th Cir. R. 26.1-1(b). [22-13449] (ECF: Stuart Walker) [Entered: 10/26/2022 12:04 PM] |
| Filing 4 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by U.S. Attorney Service - Middle District of Georgia for USA. [22-13449] (ECF: Stuart Walker) [Entered: 10/20/2022 09:25 AM] |
| USDC order denying COA as to Appellant Bacari McCarthren was filed on 09/19/2022. Docket Entry 111. [Entered: 10/17/2022 05:30 PM] |
| HABEAS APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Bacari McCarthren on 10/13/2022 USDC motion pending: Motion to Vacate under 28 U.S.C. 2255 filed on 10/17/2022. DE# 115. Fee Status: Fee Not Paid. No hearings to be transcribed. [Entered: 10/17/2022 05:17 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: Bacari McCarthren, et al v. USA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner / appellant: BACARI MCCARTHREN | |
| Represented By: | Bacari McCarthren |
| 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 / appellee: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | |
| Represented By: | U.S. Attorney Service - Middle District of Georgia |
| Represented By: | Stuart E. Walker |
| 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.
