Smalls v. United States of America
| JAMAL SMALLS |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| 26-1899 |
| July 14, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 14, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 INSTRUCTIONAL FORMS, to Pro Se litigant, SENT. [Entered: 07/14/2026 11:09 AM] |
| Filing 2 APPLICATION, for Second or Successive habeas petition, on behalf of Jamal Smalls, OPENED. [Entered: 07/14/2026 10:51 AM] |
| Filing 1 ORIGINAL PROCEEDING, MOTION for an order authorizing the district court to consider a second or successive application, on behalf of Jamal Smalls, FILED. [Entered: 07/14/2026 10:40 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.
| Search for this case: Smalls 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: JAMAL SMALLS | |
| Represented By: | Jamal Smalls |
| 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: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | |
| Represented By: | Nathan Rehn |
| 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.
