WOFFORD v. BOWEN et al
| RODNEY WOFFORD |
| Warden TOMMY BOWEN and Warden TRACY JEFFERSON |
| 3:2019cv00061 |
| July 8, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia |
| CLAY D LAND |
| CHARLES H WEIGLE |
| Habeas Corpus: General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 26, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 AMENDED #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus against TRACY JEFFERSON by RODNEY WOFFORD (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(ggs) |
| Filing 5 RESPONSE to Court Order filed by RODNEY WOFFORD re #3 Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(ggs) |
Filing 4
ORDER granting #2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by RODNEY WOFFORD; ORDER for Respondent to File Responsive Pleading re: #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by RODNEY WOFFORD; ORDER to Amend Petition. Ordered by US MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES H WEIGLE on 7/16/2019. (ggs)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge issued at the direction of the Court. (ggs)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis Filed by RODNEY WOFFORD. (Attachments: #1 Cover Letter, #2 Envelope). Motion(s) referred to CHARLES H WEIGLE.(ggs) |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUSagainst TOMMY BOWEN, TRACY JEFFERSON filed by RODNEY WOFFORD (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(ggs) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Georgia Middle 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.
