JOHNSON v. WARDEN
Petitioner: MAURICE JOHNSON
Respondent: WARDEN
Case Number: 1:2021cv02224
Filed: August 9, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Presiding Judge: Mario Garcia
Referring Judge: James R Sweeney
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 24, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 24, 2021 Filing 5 Respondent's Notice of 42-day Extension of Deadline to File a Return to Order Show Cause, filed by WARDEN. Return to Order to Show Cause deadline is 11/5/2021. (Lawyer-Smith, Marjorie)
August 19, 2021 Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Marjorie H. Lawyer-Smith on behalf of Respondent WARDEN. (Lawyer-Smith, Marjorie)
August 13, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (Disciplinary) - Maurice Johnson's petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenges his disciplinary conviction in disciplinary case number MCF 21-02-0183. The petitioner's custodian is directed to answer the allegations of the petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus and in doing so shall show cause why the relief sought by the petitioner should not be granted insofar as the petitioner challenges the deprivation of a recognized liberty interest affecting the fact or the duration of his confinement. This shall be done within forty-two (42) days of the date this Entry is signed. The petitioner shall have twenty-eight (28) days after service of such answer or return to order to show cause on him in which to reply. Show Cause Response due by 9/24/2021. If the petitioner's earliest possible release date (as reflected on the Indiana Department of Correction's website) is more than 1-year after the date the Return to Order to Show Cause is due, the Respondent is permitted to file a "Notice of 42-day Extension by Respondent (Habeas cases only)" which will extend the Respondent's deadline for filing a Return to Order to Show Cause by 42-days from the date the Notice is filed. The Notice must include the petitioner's anticipated release date if the relief sought by the petitioner is granted. Although additional motions for time are not anticipated, all subsequent motions for time must include the petitioner's anticipated release date if the relief sought by the petitioner is granted. (Copy to Petitioner via U.S. mail) Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 8/13/2021. (JDC)
August 11, 2021 Filing 2 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (DJH)
August 9, 2021 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by MAURICE JOHNSON. (Filing fee $5, receipt number IP075298) (Attachments: #1 Affidavit of Truth, #2 Exhibit A including letter, Report of Conduct, Notice of Confiscated Property, #3 Exhibit B Evidence Record, #4 Envelope)(DJH)

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 this case: JOHNSON v. WARDEN
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: MAURICE JOHNSON
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: WARDEN
Represented By: Marjorie H. Lawyer-Smith
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.


Why Is My Information Online?