In re: Keith Davi
| In re: KEITH A. DAVIS |
| 17-1726 |
| June 14, 2017 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit |
| Other |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
406753898
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [1000100793-2] in 17-1726, denying supplemental Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [1000151143-2], denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [1000129854-2] in 17-1892; granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [1000100795-2] in 17-1726; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [1000100797-2] in 17-1726. Originating case number: 3:11-cr-00512-MBS-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000187845]. Mailed to: Keith Davis. [17-1726, 17-1892]
|
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: In re: Keith Davi | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: In re: KEITH A. DAVIS | |
| Represented By: | Keith A. Davis |
| 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 ] |
| Represented By: | John David Rowell |
| 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.
