Chris Wooten v. Texas Tech Mental-Medical Svc, et al
| NFN DAVIS, Warden, NFN VEECH, C. O., MIKE JONES, Director, NEAL UNIT, NFN MCDANIEL, Assistant, JORDAN UNIT, DOCTOR PENBROOK, BRYAN COLLIER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, NFN WOODARD, C. O. and TEXAS TECH MENTAL-MEDICAL SERVICES |
| CHRIS WOOTEN, also known as Christopher Bennett Wooten |
| 20-10141 |
| February 7, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 28, 2020. 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 received from Appellant Mr. Chris Wooten because we have no jurisidcition to grant the relief [20-10141] (CNF) [Entered: 03/02/2020 08:41 AM] |
| DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the untitled documents received from Appellant Mr. Chris Wooten because we cannot determine the relief being sought or the intent of these documents [20-10141] (CNF) [Entered: 03/02/2020 08:30 AM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Case OK to Process. [9250134-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied.. Fee or motion for IFP in DC due on 04/07/2020 for Appellant Chris Wooten [20-10141] (RAJ) [Entered: 02/12/2020 11:37 AM] |
| CASE CAPTION updated. Additional appeal filed. [9246746-2] NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Chris Wooten. [9246746-1] [20-10141] (RAJ) [Entered: 02/07/2020 10:44 AM] |
| PRISONER CASE WITHOUT COUNSEL docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Chris Wooten [20-10141] (RAJ) [Entered: 02/07/2020 10:33 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.
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.
