Tammy Cofield v. Limestone CF Warden, et al
| TAMMY ROY COFIELD |
| LIMESTONE CF WARDEN and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF ALABAMA |
| 23-10503 |
| February 16, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 20, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 No action will be taken on Motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ # 6 ]. The referenced filing from Appellant Tammy Roy Cofield is deficient for failure to comply with this Court's rules on Certificates of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statements [Entered: 03/20/2023 02:00 PM] |
| Filing 6 MOTION to proceed IFP filed by Appellant Tammy Roy Cofield. Opposition to Motion is Unknown [6] [Entered: 03/20/2023 01:59 PM] |
| Filing 5 Notice of receipt: Letter regarding IFP as to Appellant Tammy Roy Cofield.. [Entered: 03/14/2023 05:10 PM] |
| Filing 4 Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Tammy Roy Cofield. [Entered: 03/14/2023 05:07 PM] |
| Filing 3 MOTION for certificate of appealability filed by Appellant Tammy Roy Cofield. Opposition to Motion is Unknown [3] [Entered: 03/14/2023 05:06 PM] |
| Filing 2 USDC order denying COA and denying IFP as to Appellant Tammy Roy Cofield was filed on 02/16/2023. Docket Entry 11 and 13. [Entered: 02/21/2023 03:24 PM] |
| Filing 1 HABEAS APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Tammy Roy Cofield on 02/16/2023. Fee Status: Fee Not Paid. No hearings to be transcribed. [Entered: 02/21/2023 03:18 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.
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.
