Brown v. Truitt
Petitioner: Kiar Brown
Respondent: C. Truitt and David Gomez
Case Number: 1:2022cv01805
Filed: April 5, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Presiding Judge: John J Tharp
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 27, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 27, 2022 Filing 9 RESPONSE to order to show cause by Petitioner Kiar Brown. (Exhibits) (daj, )
May 17, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER Signed by the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr on 5/17/2022: This Court has received, in accordance with its 4/13/22 order, Petitioner Kiar Brown's payment of the $5.00 filing fee and a 28 U.S.C 2254 petition. Preliminary review of the petition indicates that it is time-barred. See 28 U.S.C. 2244(d) (a one-year limitations period applies to federal habeas petitions). Before this case can proceed, even just to stay it while successive state post-conviction proceedings are pending, Petitioner must show cause in writing why this case should not be dismissed as untimely. Petitioner's response to this order is due by 6/17/22. His failure to respond may result in summary dismissal of this case without prejudice. Mailed notice(air, )
May 13, 2022 Filing 7 PETITION for writ of habeas corpus filed by Kiar Brown against David Gomez (jmk, )
April 21, 2022 Filing 5 DECLARATION of Kiar Brown. (Attachments). (gcy, )
April 21, 2022 Filing 4 RECEIVED PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Kiar Brown. (Attachments). (gcy, )
April 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER: Petitioner Kiar Brown, an Illinois prisoner at Stateville Correctional Center, has filed a motion to stay 28 U.S.C. 2254 proceedings in this Court. Petitioner, however, has not paid the $5.00 filing fee or submitted an in forma pauperis application demonstrating his inability to pay. Nor has he submitted a 2254 petition. Although his motion to stay tracks much of the language from this Court's 2254 petition form, it fails to identify any grounds for relief. Without an actual petition on file, this Court has no jurisdiction to grant a stay or to toll the running of the statute of limitations (and Petitioner is advised that the filing of his motion itself has not tolled the statute of limitations from running). In order for this case to remain pending in this Court, Petitioner must, by May 11, 2022: (1) either pay the filing fee or submit a completed IFP application; and (2) submit a 2254 petition that is on this Court's form, that states his grounds for relief, and that includes information about his pending st ate post-conviction proceedings. See N.D. Ill. Local Rule 81.3. Failure to comply will result in summary dismissal of this case without prejudice. See Local Rule 3.3(f); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Rule 2(c)-(d) of the Rules Governing 2254 Cases. The Clerk shall send to Petitioner a 2254 petition form and an IFP form, and shall also change the name of the Respondent to David Gomez, Stateville's current warden. See 2254 Rule 2(a). Signed by the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr on 4/13/2022: Mailed notice. (rc, )
April 13, 2022 MAILED 2254 petition form, IFP form, Order #3 dated 04/13/2022 to Kiar Brown. (rc, )
April 8, 2022 CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (ph, )
April 8, 2022 MAILED copy of the Clerk's Notice entry along with the Joint Consent Form to Plaintiff Kiar Brown. (ph, )
April 5, 2022 Filing 2 PRISONER CIVIL Cover Sheet. (ph, )
April 5, 2022 Filing 1 RECEIVED MOTION FOR LATE STAY-IN-ABEYANCE FOR PETITION for writ of habeas corpus and no copies filed by Kiar Brown against C. Truitt. (Envelope postmarked 4/1/2022) (ph, )
April 5, 2022 CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey Cole. FEE DUE, NO INFORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION SUBMITTED. Case assignment: Random assignment. (ph, )

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 Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Brown v. Truitt
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Kiar Brown
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: C. Truitt
Represented By: Chief of Criminal Appeals
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: David Gomez
Represented By: Chief of Criminal Appeals
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.


Why Is My Information Online?