Khoury v. Williams
| Michael Khoury |
| Eric Williams and R. F. Dunbar |
| 3:2021cv00461 |
| May 7, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| Stephen P McGlynn |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. § 2241 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 2, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 16
FIRST AMENDED PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Michael Khoury.(clt)
|
|
Filing 15
Order DENYING Doc. #11 Motion to Amend Petition as unnecessary. Petitioner is not required to obtain leave of the Court before amending his petition at this early stage. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15. Further, a review shows that he seeks to supplement his original petition, rather than replace it with a new petition. Although the Court normally does not accept piecemeal amendments to a habeas petition, Petitioner will be allowed to supplement the original petition as requested. The Clerk is DIRECTED to refile the original Petition (Doc. #1 ) and proposed Amended Petition (Doc. #11 ) together as the "First Amended Petition" in CM/ECF. A separate screening order will be issued once preliminary review of the First Amended Petition is complete; therefore, this Court vacates the previous screening order (Doc. #7 ) entered on June 3, 2021 as well as the government's response date of July 6, 2021. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 6/23/2021. (jce)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
|
Filing 14
ORDER denying Doc. #12 Motion for Recruitment of Counsel. Petitioner Michael Khoury requests assistance of counsel in pursuing his habeas corpus petition. When presented with a request to appoint counsel, the Court must make the following inquiries: (1) has the indigent plaintiff made a reasonable attempt to obtain counsel or effectively been precluded from doing so, and (2) given the difficulty of the case, does the plaintiff appear competent to litigate it himself. See Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007). Petitioner's motion indicates that Todd Schultz represented him in the underlying criminal matter, but is silent as to any attempts to obtain counsel on his own such that the Court cannot determine at this time whether Petitioner has made a reasonable attempt to obtain counsel on his own or has been precluded from doing so. Accordingly, the Court finds Petitioner's request premature, and his motion for recruitment of counsel is DENIED. Plaintiff may renew his request for the recruitment of counsel at a later date. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 6/23/2021. (jce)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
|
Filing 13
NOTICE of Change of Address by Michael Khoury (jaj)
|
|
Filing 12
MOTION for Recruitment of Counsel by Michael Khoury. (jaj)
|
|
Filing 11
MOTION to Amend #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Michael Khoury. (jaj)
|
|
Filing 10
STATEMENT OF ISSUE - RESPONSE to #7 Order filed by Michael Khoury. (jaj)
|
|
Set Deadlines: R. F. Dunbar answer due 7/6/2021. (kek)
|
|
Filing 9
NOTICE of Appearance by Angela Scott on behalf of R. F. Dunbar (Scott, Angela)
|
|
Filing 8
Letter to USAO constituting service. (tjk)
|
|
Filing 7
VACATED. Order for Service of Process upon Acting Warden R.F. Dunbar of FCI Jesup. Respondent shall answer the petition on or before July 6, 2021. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 6/3/2021. (jce) Modified on 6/24/2021 (clt).
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER granting #5 Motion to Substitute Party. Eric Williams (Warden, FCI-Greenville) is terminated and R.F. Dunbar (Acting Warden, FCI-Jesup) is added as respondent. Clerk to make necessary changes to docket. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 6/3/2021. (jce)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
|
Filing 5
MOTION to Substitute Defendant by Michael Khoury. (jaj)
|
|
Filing 4
NOTICE of Change of Address by Michael Khoury. (kls3)
|
|
Filing 3
Mail Returned as Undeliverable. Doc. 2 sent to Michael Khoury was returned. (kls3)
|
|
Filing fee: $ 5.00, receipt number 34625108003 (clt)
|
|
Filing 2
NOTICE AND ORDER: The Court has received your Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Your case number is 21-461-SPM. Within 30 days of the entry of this Order, you are ORDERED to submit the $5.00 filing fee or a motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. If you file a motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, the Court must review your trust fund account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of this action. Thus, you must have the Trust Fund Officer at your facility complete the attached certification and provide a copy of your trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent). If you fail to pay the filing fee or submit the motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee by the deadline, the case will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); Sperow v. Melvin, 153 F.3d 780, 781 (7th Cir. 1998). All mail should be sent to: Clerk's Office, U.S. District Court, 750 Missouri Avenue, East St. Louis, IL 62201. Finally, you are advised that if your address changes, you must notify the Court within seven days of the change by filing a Notice of Change of Address. Failure to do so could result in the dismissal of your case. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 5/7/2021. (jaj)
|
|
Filing 1
PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Michael Khoury.(jaj)
|
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 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.
