DENNIS v. STATE OF INDIANA et al
||MICHAEL J. DENNIS
||ERIC HOLCOMB, JOE HOGSETT, INDIANAPOLIS CITY COUNTY OF MARION CONSOLIDATED, INDIANAPOLIS METROPOLITAN CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS/COUNTY OF MARION, INDIANAPOLIS PUBLIC DEFENDER BOARD and STATE OF INDIANA
||July 26, 2017
||US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
||Debra McVicker Lynch
||Tanya Walton Pratt
|Nature of Suit:
||Habeas Corpus (General)
|Cause of Action:
||28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|August 9, 2017
ENTRY Directing Further Proceedings - Petitioner Michael J. Dennis is instructed to pay the $5.00 associated with this action or demonstrate that he is unable to pay the filing fee by filing a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The petition in this action is rejected. However, this will not lead to the dismissal of Mr. Dennis' action. Instead, Mr. Dennis will be given an opportunity to file an amended petition that satisfies the habeas rules by setting forth a coherent claim. The Cou rt has attached a blank petition for relief from a conviction or sentence for the petitioner. Mr. Dennis shall have through September 11, 2017, to file an amended petition. The amended petition should contain the case number, 1:17-cv-2522-TWP-DML, an d be titled "amended petition for writ of habeas corpus." The clerk is instructed to update the docket to reflect that the parties in this action should be referred to as petitioner and respondent. Copy sent to plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/9/2017. (MAT)
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
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?