In re: Roger Day, Jr.
| In re: ROGER CHARLES DAY, JR. |
| 21-1140 |
| February 5, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 5, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER filed granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis [3]. Copies to all parties. Mailed to: Roger Day Jr. [1000894652] [21-1140] RJL [Entered: 02/05/2021 10:20 AM]
|
| Filing 4 DOCKETING NOTICE issued Re: [ # 1 ] case. Originating case number: 3:07-cr-00154-JAG-3. Mailed to: Roger Day, Jr. [21-1140] RJL [Entered: 02/05/2021 10:16 AM] |
| Filing 3 IFP-APPLICATION to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24)(court access only) by Roger Charles Day, Jr. [21-1140] RJL [Entered: 02/05/2021 10:12 AM] |
| Filing 2 Petition for writ of mandamus filed by Roger Charles Day, Jr. [21-1140] RJL [Entered: 02/05/2021 10:10 AM] |
| Filing 1 Case docketed. Originating case number: 3:07-cr-00154-JAG-3. Case manager: Rachel Lee. [21-1140] RJL [Entered: 02/05/2021 10:03 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: In re: Roger Day, Jr. | |
|---|---|
| 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: ROGER CHARLES DAY, JR. | |
| Represented By: | Roger Charles Day Jr. |
| 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.
