Antwon Jenkins v. USA
| ANTWON D. JENKINS |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| 23-1407 |
| March 3, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Prisoner Petition-Vacate Sentence |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 19, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 Filed District Court order GRANTING Appellant Antwon D. Jenkins leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Date IFP granted: 04/19/2023. [14] [7305008] [23-1407] (AP) [Entered: 04/19/2023 04:06 PM] |
Filing 13
ORDER re: 1) Appellate's Initial Brief for Release Pending Habeas Review. [ # 10 ] 2) Jurisdictional Statement. 3) Government's Response to Court's March 7, 2023, Order. The appellants motion for release is DENIED. See Cherek v. United States, 767 F.2d 335, 337 (7th Cir. 1985). The appellant also seeks to challenge the district courts denial of his requests for additional discovery and transcripts, but the district court has not issued a final decision, see 28 U.S.C. 1291, and there is no basis for interlocutory review of this portion of the district courts order. Accordingly, the remainder of this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of appellate jurisdiction. See Cunningham v. Hamilton County, 527 U.S. 198, 204 (1999); Reise v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. of Wis. Sys., 957 F.2d 293, 295 (7th Cir. 1992). Diane S. Sykes, Chief Judge; Diane P. Wood, Circuit Judge and John Z. Lee, Circuit Judge. [13] [7304427] [23-1407] (AD) [Entered: 04/17/2023 04:16 PM]
|
|
Filing 12
ORDER re: Motion for permission to file reply brief to governments response. [ # 11 ] In light of the courts order dated March 31, 2023, the appellants motion will be filed without further court action. The clerk shall send the appellant a copy of the courts public docket. CDH [12] [7303132] [23-1407] (PS) [Entered: 04/11/2023 11:47 AM]
|
| Filing 11 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Antwon D. Jenkins for permission to file reply brief. [11] [7302688] [23-1407] (LCP) [Entered: 04/07/2023 03:19 PM] |
| Filing 10 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Antwon D. Jenkins for release. [10] [7302686] [23-1407]--[Edited 04/10/2023 by LCP to reflect correct filing type] (LCP) [Entered: 04/07/2023 03:17 PM] |
|
Filing 9
ORDER: This appeal, in part, seeks review of a decision denying release pending the resolution of a 2255 motion filed in the district court. Appellant should, therefore, file an appropriate motion as to the decision rather than having the case proceed to full briefing. See Cir. R. 9. The motion and accompanying memorandum of law shall be filed on or before 04/28/2023. DW [7301026][9][9] [7301026] [23-1407] (MAN) [Entered: 03/31/2023 09:33 AM]
|
| Filing 8 Filed Response by Appellee USA Attorney Angela Scott to to Court's March 7, 2023, Order. [8][7300598] [23-1407] (Scott, Angela) [Entered: 03/29/2023 02:10 PM] |
| Filing 7 Notification from the District Court that a motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is pending. [7] [7299655] [23-1407] (CG) [Entered: 03/24/2023 12:28 PM] |
|
Filing 6
ORDER: On consideration of paper captioned Appellates Motion Supporting Jurisdiction For Denial of Discovery Request in Light of 28 U.S.C. 1291 (Collateral Order Doctrine) filed by appellant on March 20, 2023, the appellee shall file, on or before March 29, 2023, a response to appellants filing, addressing the jurisdictional issue raised in the courts order of March 7, 2023. DW [6] [7298876] [23-1407] (CG) [Entered: 03/21/2023 02:24 PM]
|
| Filing 5 Filed Seventh Circuit Transcript Information Sheet by Appellant Antwon D. Jenkins. [5] [7298811] [23-1407] (AD) [Entered: 03/21/2023 11:38 AM] |
| Filing 4 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Antwon D. Jenkins to grant his motion to retain jurisdiction. [4] [7298626] [23-1407] (LCP) [Entered: 03/20/2023 04:06 PM] |
| Filing 3 Jurisdictional statement filed by Appellant Antwon D. Jenkins. [3] [7297954] [23-1407]--[Edited 03/16/2023 by FP to reflect correct document.] (LCP) [Entered: 03/16/2023 03:19 PM] |
|
Filing 2
ORDER: Appellant Antwon D. Jenkins shall file a brief memorandum stating why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, or limited to a review of the order denying relief. Briefing is SUSPENDED pending further court order. (See order for further details) [7295728] Jurisdictional memorandum due for Appellant Antwon D. Jenkins by 03/21/2023. DW [2] [7295728] [23-1407] (MAN) [Entered: 03/07/2023 01:34 PM]
|
| Filing 1 Federal prisoner's 2255 case docketed. Certificate of Appealability pending. Fee due. Docketing Statement due for Appellant Antwon D. Jenkins by 03/10/2023. Fee or IFP forms due on 03/17/2023 for Appellant Antwon D. Jenkins. Transcript information sheet due by 03/17/2023. [1] [7295378] [23-1407] (ER) [Entered: 03/06/2023 12:38 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: Antwon Jenkins v. USA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner / appellant: ANTWON D. JENKINS | |
| Represented By: | Antwon D. Jenkins |
| 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: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | |
| Represented By: | Angela Scott |
| 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.
