Flores v. Lumpkin
Petitioner / Appellant: Fidel Flores
Respondent / Appellee: Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Case Number: 21-20579
Filed: October 28, 2021
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
July 7, 2023 Summary Flores v. Lumpkin

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 7, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 7, 2021 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Jennifer Wissinger for party(s) Appellee Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, in case 21-20579 [21-20579] (ABT) [Entered: 12/07/2021 06:50 AM]
December 6, 2021 APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [21-20579] (Jennifer Wissinger ) [Entered: 12/06/2021 02:17 PM]
November 15, 2021 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL FILED. Admitted Exhibits on File in District Court? No. Video/Audio Exhibits on File in District Court? No State Court Papers included? Yes. Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [21-20579] (DDL) [Entered: 11/15/2021 02:07 PM]
November 15, 2021 LETTER ISSUED. Motion for COA and brief in support are required. Motion due on 12/27/2021 for Appellant Fidel Flores. Brief in Support due on 12/27/2021 for Appellant Fidel Flores [21-20579] (DDL) [Entered: 11/15/2021 02:08 PM]
November 10, 2021 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED from District Court for 4:20-CV-2252. Electronic ROA due on 11/26/2021. [21-20579] (CAG) [Entered: 11/10/2021 12:18 PM]
November 10, 2021 INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete. Action: Case OK to Process. [9709468-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [21-20579] (CAG) [Entered: 11/10/2021 12:16 PM]
November 9, 2021 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Bryan Garris for Appellant Fidel Flores in 21-20579 [21-20579] (CAG) [Entered: 11/09/2021 11:13 AM]
November 7, 2021 APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Bryan Garris for Mr. Fidel Flores for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [21-20579] (Bryan Garris ) [Entered: 11/07/2021 10:01 PM]
November 7, 2021 TRANSCRIPT ORDER received advising transcript unnecessary - no hearings. [21-20579] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: TRANSCRIPT ORDER received from Appellant Mr. Fidel Flores advising transcript unnecessary for appeal purposes. Date of Service: 11/07/2021 via email - Attorney for Appellant: Garris; Attorney for Appellee: Marshall [21-20579] (Bryan Garris ) [Entered: 11/07/2021 10:04 PM]
October 28, 2021 PRISONER CASE WITH COUNSEL docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Fidel Flores [21-20579] (MVM) [Entered: 10/28/2021 03:09 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.

Search for this case: Flores v. Lumpkin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner / appellant: Fidel Flores
Represented By: Bryan Garris
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: Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Represented By: Edward Larry Marshall
Represented By: Jennifer Wissinger
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.


Why Is My Information Online?