In re: James Rose
| In re: JAMES ROSE |
| 23-137 |
| March 14, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 14, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 DOCKETING NOTICE issued Re: [ # 2 ] Motion for authorization to file successive habeas application (Local Rule 22(d)). Mailed to: James Rose, #293938, MCCORMICK CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, 386 Redemption Way, McCormick, SC 29899-0000 and Alan Wilson, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, P. O. Box 11549, Columbia, SC 29211. [1001331156] [23-137] NRS [Entered: 03/14/2023 10:01 AM] |
| Filing 1 2244 case docketed. Case manager: NaeemahSims. [1001331143] [23-137] NRS [Entered: 03/14/2023 09:53 AM] |
| Filing 2 Motion for authorization to file successive application for post-conviction relief (Local Rule 22(d)) filed by James Rose. Are PSR & SOR available on district court docket? NA. Has sentencing transcript been prepared? NA. [1001331151] [23-137] NRS [Entered: 03/14/2023 09:58 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: James Rose | |
|---|---|
| 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: JAMES ROSE | |
| Represented By: | James Rose |
| 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.
