Abdullah v. Lange
| Tamir Abdullah |
| Eddy Lange and Jeff Landry |
| 22-51052 |
| December 5, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Habeas Corpus (Prisoner Petition) |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 3, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 BRIEF IN SUPPORT filed by Appellant Mr. Tamir Abdullah in support of Motion for certificate of appealability [ # 9 ] (INCORPORATED IN MOTION FOR COA) Brief in Support deadline satisfied. [10] [22-51052] (MRW) [Entered: 01/06/2023 01:52 PM] |
| Filing 9 MOTION filed by Appellant Mr. Tamir Abdullah for certificate of appealability [9]. Motion due deadline satisfied. [22-51052] (MRW) [Entered: 01/06/2023 01:51 PM] |
| Filing 7 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? No. Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [22-51052] (DDL) [Entered: 12/13/2022 02:31 PM] |
| Filing 6 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED from District Court for 6:22-CV-1096. Electronic ROA due on 12/23/2022. [22-51052] (MFY) [Entered: 12/08/2022 03:24 PM] |
| Filing 5 INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete. Action: Case OK to Process. [5] Initial AA Check Due satisfied.. Motion due on 01/17/2023 for Appellant Tamir Abdullah. Brief in Support due on 01/17/2023 for Appellant Tamir Abdullah [22-51052] (MFY) [Entered: 12/08/2022 03:13 PM] |
| Filing 1 PRISONER CASE WITHOUT COUNSEL docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Tamir Abdullah [22-51052] (RSM) [Entered: 12/05/2022 01:46 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.
