USA v. Darryl Burke
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| DARRYL BURKE, a.k.a. David Middleton a.k.a. James Duncan a.k.a. Donald Brown a.k.a. Dr. Jeffrey Burke |
| 25-10749 |
| March 6, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 4, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
ORDER: Motion to voluntarily dismiss appeal filed by Appellant Darryl Burke is GRANTED by clerk [ # 12 ]. Pursuant to FRAP 42 and 11th Cir. R. 42-1(a), the above referenced appeal was duly entered dismissed on this date. [Entered: 06/04/2025 11:38 AM]
|
| Filing 12 MOTION to voluntarily dismiss appeal filed by Darryl Burke. Motion is Unopposed. [12] [25-10749] (ECF: Margaret Foldes) [Entered: 06/03/2025 03:24 PM] |
|
Filing 11
ORDER: The motion for an extension of time to and including June 16, 2025, to file Appellants initial brief is GRANTED, with the appendix due 7 days after the filing of the brief. [ # 10 ] EJK (See attached order for complete text) [Entered: 05/19/2025 08:07 AM]
|
| Filing 10 MOTION for extension of time to file appellant's brief to 06/16/2025 filed by Darryl Burke. Motion is Unopposed. [10] [25-10749] (ECF: Margaret Foldes) [Entered: 05/13/2025 02:31 PM] |
| Filing 9 Over the phone extension granted by clerk as to Attorney Margaret Y. Foldes for Appellant Darryl Burke. Appellants brief due on 05/15/2025 as to Appellant Darryl Burke. Appendix due on 05/22/2025 as to Appellant Darryl Burke. Any request for a second or subsequent extension of time shall be subject to 11th Cir. R. 31-2(d). [Entered: 04/09/2025 03:55 PM] |
| Filing 8 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney Daniel Matzkin 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). [25-10749] (ECF: Daniel Matzkin) [Entered: 03/13/2025 01:12 PM] |
| Filing 7 Briefing Notice issued to Appellant Darryl Burke. The appellant's brief is due on or before 04/15/2025. The appendix is due no later than 7 days from the filing of the appellant's brief. [Entered: 03/12/2025 09:28 AM] |
| Filing 6 TRANSCRIPT ORDER FORM SUBMITTED by Attorney Margaret Y. Foldes for Appellant Darryl Burke. All necessary transcript(s) are on file. [25-10749] (ECF: Margaret Foldes) [Entered: 03/12/2025 08:50 AM] |
| Filing 5 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney Margaret Y. Foldes for Appellant Darryl Burke. 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). [25-10749] (ECF: Margaret Foldes) [Entered: 03/11/2025 04:36 PM] |
| Filing 4 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Margaret Y. Foldes for Darryl Burke. Related cases? No. [25-10749] (ECF: Margaret Foldes) [Entered: 03/11/2025 04:36 PM] |
| Filing 3 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Hector A. Dopico for Darryl Burke Related cases? No. [25-10749] (ECF: Hector Dopico) [Entered: 03/11/2025 04:34 PM] |
| Filing 2 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Daniel Matzkin for USA Related cases? No. [25-10749] (ECF: Daniel Matzkin) [Entered: 03/10/2025 02:21 PM] |
| Filing 1 CRIMINAL APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Darryl Burke on 03/05/2025. Fee Status: Fee Not Required. [Entered: 03/10/2025 10:41 AM] |
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.
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.
