Denny Ross v. David Yost, et al
| SUMMIT COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS and DAVID YOST, Attorney General of the State of Ohio |
| DENNY ROSS |
| 20-3477 |
| May 5, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 24, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 LETTER SENT to Mr. Michael J. Benza for Denny Ross in response to the Notification filed May 18, 2020. Counsel advised to refer to the case opening letter sent May 5, 2020 regarding a motion to grant Certificate of Appealability. (JAC) [Entered: 06/24/2020 09:37 AM] |
| Filing 6 The case manager for this case is now: Julie A. Connor (LAJ) [Entered: 06/09/2020 12:57 PM] |
| Filing 5 TRANSCRIPT ORDER filed - no hearings held in District Court. Filed by Mr. Michael J. Benza for Denny Ross. Certificate of Service: 05/26/2020. [20-3477] (MJB) [Entered: 05/26/2020 12:48 PM] |
| Filing 4 NOTIFICATION filed by Mr. Michael J. Benza for Denny Ross regarding Notice of Intent to Petition for Certificate of Appealability on or before September 15, 2020. Certificate of Service: 05/18/2020. [20-3477]--[Edited 06/24/2020 by JAC] (MJB) [Entered: 05/18/2020 01:39 PM] |
| Filing 3 APPEARANCE filed for Appellant Denny Ross by Michael J. Benza. Certificate of Service: 05/18/2020. [20-3477] (MJB) [Entered: 05/18/2020 01:37 PM] |
| Filing 2 The case manager for this case is: Jennifer Earl (JE) [Entered: 05/05/2020 01:27 PM] |
| Filing 1 Prisoner Case Docketed with certificate of appealability denied. Notice filed by Appellant Denny Ross. Transcript needed: n. (JE) [Entered: 05/05/2020 01:23 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.
