Reid v. Caley
| Marcus R. Reid |
| Ed Caley and Attorney General of the State of Colorado, The |
| 1:2021cv02808 |
| October 18, 2021 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Gordon P Gallagher |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 13, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT re: #8 Certificate of Service by Respondent Attorney General of the State of Colorado (trvo, ) |
| Filing 11 RESPONSE to #7 Order,, to file Pre-Answer Response by Respondents Attorney General of the State of Colorado, The, Ed Caley. (Attachments: #1 A, #2 B, #3 C, #4 D, #5 E)(Crane, Ryan) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Ryan Alan Crane on behalf of Attorney General of the State of Colorado, The, Ed CaleyAttorney Ryan Alan Crane added to party Attorney General of the State of Colorado, The(pty:res), Attorney Ryan Alan Crane added to party Ed Caley(pty:res) (Crane, Ryan) |
| Filing 9 ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE of the #1 Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus, #7 Order to File Pre-Answer Response on 12/3/2021, filed by Respondent Ed Caley. (trvo, ) |
| Filing 8 CERTIFICATE of Service by Clerk of Court re #1 Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus, #7 Order to File Pre-Answer Response for Service of Process. (trvo, ) |
Filing 7
ORDER TO FILE PRE-ANSWER RESPONSE. It is ORDERED that within twenty-one (21) days from the date of this order Respondents shall file a pre-answer response that complies with this order. It is FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-one (21) days of the filing of the pre-answer response Applicant may file a reply. It is FURTHER ORDERED that if Respondents do not intend to raise the affirmative defenses of timeliness or exhaustion of state-court remedies, Respondents must notify the Court of that decision in the pre-answer response. By Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher on 11/30/2021. (trvo, )
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER Granting Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915. It is ORDERED that the Prisoner's Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915 in a Habeas Corpus Action (ECF No. #5 ) is granted. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the previously-filed Prisoner's Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915 in a Habeas Corpus Action (ECF No. #3 ) is denied as moot. It is FURTHER ORDERED that process shall not issue at this time. By Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher on 11/19/2021.(trvo, )
|
| Filing 5 Prisoner's Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915 in a Habeas Corpus Action by Petitioner Marcus R. Reid. (trvo, ) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER Directing Applicant to Cure Deficiencies. It is ORDERED that Applicant cure the deficiency designated within thirty (30) days from the date of this order. It is FURTHER ORDERED that, if Applicant fails to cure the designated deficiency within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, the action will be dismissed without further notice. The dismissal shall be without prejudice. By Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher on 10/19/2021. (trvo, )
|
| Filing 2 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher. Text Only Entry (cpomm, ) |
| Filing 1 APPLICATION for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 USC 2254, filed by Marcus R. Reid. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(cpomm, ) |
| Filing 3 Prisoner's Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915 in a Habeas Corpus Action by Petitioner Marcus R. Reid. (agarc, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
