Fletcher v. Hulick et al
Robert D Fletcher |
Donald Hulick and Attorney General of the State of Illinois |
3:2008cv00266 |
April 8, 2008 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
East St. Louis Office |
Randolph |
G. Patrick Murphy |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 101 ORDER denying 98 Motion for relief from judgment and denying as moot 99 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 10/8/14. (klh, ) |
Filing 81 ORDER denying 75 Motion for Certificate of Appealability; granting 78 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge G. Patrick Murphy on 1/13/2012. (MAB) |
Filing 71 ORDER denying 69 Motion of objection; denying 70 Motion to Alter Judgment. Signed by Judge G. Patrick Murphy on 11/14/2011. (ktc) |
Filing 67 ORDER DENYING 52 Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Robert D. Fletcher. Signed by Judge G. Patrick Murphy on 9/30/2011. (ssd) |
Filing 40 ORDER DENYING 32 MOTION to Stay and Abeyance filed by Robert D Fletcher. Petitioner must either file a second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus or voluntarily dismiss his amended petition by 3/8/2011. Respondent's answer is due by 3/29/2011. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donald G. Wilkerson on 2/7/11. (alg) |
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 Southern 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.