Gilliam v. United States of America
Richard Gilliam |
United States of America |
21-3041 |
December 14, 2021 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit |
Other |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 15, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 6 INSTRUCTIONAL FORMS, to Pro Se litigant, SENT.[3228439] [21-3041] [Entered: 12/15/2021 08:46 AM] |
Filing 2 MOTION, to file successive petition, on behalf of Petitioner Richard Gilliam, FILED. Service date 12/08/2021 by US mail.[3228433] [21-3041] [Entered: 12/15/2021 08:36 AM] |
Filing 1 ORIGINAL PROCEEDING, PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, on behalf of Petitioner Richard Gilliam, FILED.[3228431] [21-3041] [Entered: 12/15/2021 08:30 AM] |
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: Gilliam v. United States of America | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: Richard Gilliam | |
Represented By: | Richard Gilliam |
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: United States of America | |
Represented By: | David C. James |
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.