Pete Russell v. Lorie Davis, Director
| PETE RUSSELL |
| LORIE DAVIS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION |
| 19-70015 |
| August 28, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| Pete Russell v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 23, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the Motion for Extension of Time to file Application for Certificate of Appealability and leave to file the motion for COA out of time received from Appellant Mr. Pete Russell because the incorrect event was use when filing the motion [19-70015] (MRW) [Entered: 10/25/2019 08:06 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Ms. Rachel Leigh Patton for Ms. Lorie Davis, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [19-70015] (Rachel Leigh Patton ) [Entered: 09/25/2019 10:02 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Rachel Leigh Patton for Appellee Lorie Davis, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division in 19-70015 [19-70015] (MRW) [Entered: 09/25/2019 01:29 PM] |
| LETTER ISSUED. Motion for COA and brief in support are required. Motion due on 10/21/2019 for Appellant Pete Russell. Brief in Support due on 10/21/2019 for Appellant Pete Russell [19-70015] (MRW) [Entered: 09/10/2019 09:34 AM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL FILED. Exhibits on File in District Court? No. State Court Papers included? Yes. Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [19-70015] (MRW) [Entered: 09/10/2019 09:34 AM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Case OK to Process. [9135137-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [19-70015] (MRW) [Entered: 09/03/2019 11:14 AM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED FROM DISTRICT COURT for 4:13-CV-3636. Electronic ROA due on 09/18/2019. [19-70015] (MRW) [Entered: 09/03/2019 11:18 AM] |
| CJA APPOINTMENT for Attorney Mr. Winston Earle Cochran, Jr. for Mr. Pete Russell. Counsel must use the eVoucher system to file the voucher at disposition of the case. Please see the attached document for further guidance. ORIGINATING COURT DISTRICT: STX ORIGINATING CASE NUMBER: 4:13-CV-3636 DATE OF APPOINTMENT: 08/27/2019 [19-70015] (MRW) [Entered: 08/28/2019 10:18 AM] |
| DEATH PENALTY CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Pete Russell [19-70015] (MRW) [Entered: 08/28/2019 10:08 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: Pete Russell v. Lorie Davis, Director | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner / appellant: PETE RUSSELL | |
| Represented By: | Winston Earle Cochran 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 ] |
| Respondent / appellee: LORIE DAVIS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION | |
| Represented By: | Rachel Leigh Patton |
| 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.
