POSEY v. SEVIER et al
ROBERT ERIC POSEY |
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF INDIANA and MARK SEVIER |
1:2019cv03763 |
September 4, 2019 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
Tim A Baker |
Jane Magnus-Stinson |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on August 13, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 6 MOTION to Dismiss , filed by Respondent MARK SEVIER. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - CCS, #2 Exhibit B - DA Dkt., #3 Exhibit C - DA Appellant's, #4 Exhibit D - DA Appellee's, #5 Exhibit E - DA Memo Decision, #6 Exhibit F - DA Pet for Reh'g, #7 Exhibit G - DA Pet. to Trans., #8 Exhibit H - PCR CCS, #9 Exhibit I - PCR Dkt., #10 Exhibit J - PCR Appellant's, #11 Exhibit K - PCR Appellee's, #12 Exhibit L - PCR Reply, #13 Exhibit M - PCR Memo Decision, #14 Exhibit N - PCR Pet. to Trans.)(Drum, Jesse) |
Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Jesse R. Drum on behalf of Respondents ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF INDIANA, MARK SEVIER. (Drum, Jesse) |
Filing 4 CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by ROBERT ERIC POSEY. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(JDH) |
![]() |
Filing 2 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (REO) |
Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by ROBERT ERIC POSEY. (Filing fee $5, receipt number IP066489) (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(REO) |
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 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.