COOPER v. SUPERINTENDENT CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
| CARL COOPER |
| SUPERINTENDENT CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY |
| 1:2016cv02994 |
| November 2, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Mark J. Dinsmore |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
36
ENTRY Concerning Selected Matters: This action for habeas corpus relief brought by Petitioner Carl Cooper ("Cooper"), a state inmate, was dismissed on April 3, 2017 based on the finding that he failed to exhaust available state court remedies prior to filing the action. In a motion filed on April 20, 2017, the Cooper seeks reconsideration of the disposition based on the re- assertion of the merits of his habeas claim. There was no manifest error of law or fact in this case. The Court did not misapprehend the claims, nor did it misapply the law to those claims in finding that dismissal without prejudice was required. Accordingly, the motion to reconsider Dkt. 35 , treated as a motion to alter or amend judgment, is denied. Cooper's motion to compel production of transcripts Dkt. 34 is denied because there was no hearing on April 3, 2017 and because there were no proceedings conducted in this case from which transcripts could be produced. See Entry for additional information. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/20/2017. (SWM)
|
|
Filing
32
ENTRY DISMISSING ACTION AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT - The action is therefore dismissed without prejudice base on Cooper's failure to exhaust available remedies in the Indiana state courts prior to filing this action. Judgment consi stent with this Entry shall now issue. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b), Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing ' 2254 Proceedings, and 28 U.S.C. ' 2253(c), the court finds that Cooper has failed to show that reasonable jurists would find it Adebatable whether [this court] was correct in its procedural ruling." The Court therefore denies a certificate of appealability. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 4/3/2017.(JLS)
|
|
Filing
8
ENTRY - The petitioner's motion for the appointment of counsel [dkt 7 ] is denied. (See entry.) Copy to Petitioner via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 11/21/2016. (JLS)
|
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 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
| Search for this case: COOPER v. SUPERINTENDENT CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: CARL COOPER | |
| 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: SUPERINTENDENT CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY | |
| Represented By: | Jesse R. Drum |
| 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.
