Bruce Merryman v. TX Board of Pardons and Parole, et al
| ANTHONY RAMIREZ, Parole Voter, San Antonio Board Office, FRED SOLIZ, Parole Voter, San Antonio Board Office, DAVID GUTIERREZ, Director, Texas Board of Pardons and Parole, CHARLES SPEIR, Parole Voter, San Antonio Board Office and TEXAS BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLE |
| BRUCE RANDOL MERRYMAN |
| 19-50585 |
| June 25, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| Bruce Merryman v. TX Board of Pardons and Parole, |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 23, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| DISTRICT COURT ORDER of 08/22/2019 denying IFP for Appellant Mr. Bruce Randol Merryman because appeal is not taken in good faith - fee assessment required - BAUGH case. (The initial partial filing fee cannot be assessed because plaintiff failed to file a current institutional trust fund account statement with his IFP application. Plaintiff has 30 days from the date of district court's order to file a current TDCJ institutional trust fund accound statement) [19-50585] (SDH) [Entered: 08/23/2019 10:17 AM] |
| DISTRICT COURT NOTICE - IFP pending for Appellant Mr. Bruce Randol Merryman. Fee deadline satisfied. [19-50585] (CNF) [Entered: 08/07/2019 08:52 AM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Case OK to Process. [9087958-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied.. Fee or motion for IFP in DC due on 08/26/2019 for Appellant Bruce Randol Merryman [19-50585] (WMJ) [Entered: 07/01/2019 01:29 PM] |
| PRISONER CASE WITHOUT COUNSEL docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Bruce Randol Merryman [19-50585] (WMJ) [Entered: 06/25/2019 02:35 PM] |
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.
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.
