USA v. Roderick King
Plaintiff / Appellee: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant: RODERICK KING
Case Number: 22-3095
Filed: November 8, 2022
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
August 21, 2024 USA v. Roderick King

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 9, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 9, 2022 Filing 6 ECF FILER: ENTRY OF APPEARANCE from Laura Schleich Irwin on behalf of Appellee(s) United States of America. [22-3095] (LSI) [Entered: 11/09/2022 02:18 PM]
November 9, 2022 Filing 5 Certified copy of Amended Notice of Appeal filed in the district court on 11/08/2022 received from Clerk of District Court. (SB) [Entered: 11/09/2022 11:34 AM]
November 8, 2022 Filing 4 HASHAGEN ORDER staying case pending entry of judgment and commitment order in District Court. (CJG) [Entered: 11/08/2022 02:24 PM]
November 8, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER (Clerk) Appellant chose to waive his right to counsel and proceed pro se in the District Court. The District Court appointed Michael Ovens, Esq. as stand-by counsel. Appellant is advised that unlike proceedings in District Court, there is no right to proceed pro se on appeal. This Court in its discretion may permit an appellant to proceed pro se if an appellant knowingly and voluntarily waives the right to counsel. The Supreme Court has instructed that in order for a waiver to be knowing and voluntary, a litigant must be "made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self representation". Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975). As such, Appellant is advised of the potential dangers and disadvantages of proceeding pro se on appeal. Appellant may elect to either waive counsel and proceed pro se on appeal or accept representation by Michael Ovens, Esq. and must make his election known to the Clerk by filing the waiver of counsel form or by filing a written statement accepting representation by Michael Ovens, Esq. within 14 days of the date of this order. Michael Ovens, Esq. has been appointed as counsel for Appellant until such time as Appellant informs the Clerk of his choice. In the event Appellant fails to respond to this Order, it will be presumed that Appellant has chosen to be represented by Michael Ovens, Esq. [-See Order for Full Text.] (CJG) [Entered: 11/08/2022 02:23 PM]
November 8, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER appointing Michael Ovens, Esq. as CJA counsel to continue to represent Appellant Roderick King. (CJG) [Entered: 11/08/2022 02:17 PM]
November 8, 2022 Filing 1 CRIMINAL CASE DOCKETED. Notice filed by Roderick King in District Court No. 2-21-cr-00184-001. (CJG) [Entered: 11/08/2022 02:13 PM]

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: USA v. Roderick King
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff / appellee: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Represented By: Laura S. Irwin Esq.
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 ]
Defendant / appellant: RODERICK KING
Represented By: Roderick King
Represented By: Michael Ovens Esq.
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.


Why Is My Information Online?