USA v. Howard Cotterman
HOWARD WESLEY COTTERMAN |
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
21-10040 |
February 5, 2021 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
Other |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 12, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 5 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: DL): The district court docket reflects that the district court found defendant financially eligible for appointed counsel. Because appellants in forma pauperis status continues in this court, see Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3), appellants request to proceed in forma pauperis on consolidated appeal nos. 20-10371 and 21-10040, submitted at Docket Entry Nos. [ # 4 ] and 4, respectively, is unnecessary. The previously established briefing schedule remains in effect. [12002857] [20-10371, 21-10040] (JBS) [Entered: 02/12/2021 04:28 PM] |
Filing 4 Filed Appellant Howard Wesley Cotterman letter dated re: filing fees. Paper filing deficiency: None. [12000989] [21-10040, 20-10371] (JFF) [Entered: 02/11/2021 02:31 PM] |
Filing 3 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: KH): Appellants motion for coordinated briefing (Docket Entry No. [ # 11993575-5 ] in Appeal No. 20-10371) is treated as a motion to consolidate Appeal Nos. 20-10371 and 21- 10040. So treated, the motion is granted. Appeal Nos. 20-10371 and 21-10040 are consolidated. Appellants motion (Docket Entry No. [ # 11993577-6 ] in Appeal No. 20-10371) for an extension of time to file the consolidated opening brief is granted. The briefing schedule for these consolidated appeals is set as follows: appellants consolidated opening brief is due March 29, 2021; the consolidated answering brief and supplemental excerpts of record are due April 28, 2021; and the optional consolidated reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. Because appellant is proceeding without counsel, the excerpts of record requirement is waived. See 9th Cir. R. 30-1.3. Appellees supplemental excerpts of record must contain all of the documents that are cited in appellants pro se opening brief or otherwise required by Rule 30-1.4, as well as the documents that are cited in appellees brief. See 9th Cir. R. 30-1.3. [11996633] [20-10371, 21-10040] (WL) [Entered: 02/08/2021 03:55 PM] |
Filing 2 Fee status changed; IFP not revoked. ( [Case Number 21-10040: IFP] ). [11995911] (DL) [Entered: 02/08/2021 11:32 AM] |
Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. Reporters Transcript required: No. Sentence imposed: 5 years with credit for time served. Appellant Howard Wesley Cotterman opening brief due 03/29/2021. Appellee United States of America answering brief due 04/27/2021. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11994496] (JPD) [Entered: 02/05/2021 01:39 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: USA v. Howard Cotterman | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant / appellant: HOWARD WESLEY COTTERMAN | |
Represented By: | Howard Wesley Cotterman |
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 ] |
Plaintiff / appellee: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | |
Represented By: | Carin C. Duryee |
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.