King v. Warden
| Danny King |
| Warden |
| INDIANA STATE PRISON E-FILE (Court Use Only) |
| 3:2019cv00358 |
| May 6, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
| Jon E DeGuilio |
| Michael G Gotsch |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 10, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER DENYING #2 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael G Gotsch, Sr on 6/26/19. (jld)
|
| Filing 6 MAGISTRATE JUDGE CONSENT FORMS sent to all parties.. Magistrate Consent forms due by 7/17/2019. (slm) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by David E Corey on behalf of Warden (Corey, David) |
| Filing 4 Consent to Receipt of Documents Through Prisoner Electronic Filing Program (ISP) by Danny King (nae) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: The Respondent is ORDERED to enter an appearance by 6/3/2019 and file a response to the petition with the entire administrative record by 7/15/2019. Signed by Judge Jon E DeGuilio on 5/8/19. (Copy mailed to pro se party and Warden)(ksp)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel by Petitioner Danny King. (nae) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee $ 5 paid, receipt #3022295), filed by Danny King. (Returned file stamped copy to King) (Attachments: #1 Exhibits, #2 Envelope)(nae) |
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 Indiana Northern 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.
