CRUME v. KNIGHT
| TEVIN CRUME |
| WENDY KNIGHT |
| 1:2021cv02580 |
| October 4, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Matthew P Brookman |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 30, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by David Corey on behalf of Respondent WENDY KNIGHT. (Corey, David) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Natalie Faye Weiss on behalf of Respondent WENDY KNIGHT. (Weiss, Natalie) |
Filing 4
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (Disciplinary) - Tevin Crume's petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenges his disciplinary conviction in disciplinary case number CIC 21-02-0154. 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. 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. Copies sent pursuant to distribution list. Show Cause Response due by 12/29/2021. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 11/17/2021.(AKH)
|
| Filing 3 RECEIPT #IP076694 for filing fee in the amount of $5.00, paid by TEVIN CRUME. (DJH) |
| Filing 2 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (DJH) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by TEVIN CRUME. (No fee paid with this filing) (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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: CRUME v. KNIGHT | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: TEVIN CRUME | |
| 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: WENDY KNIGHT | |
| Represented By: | David Corey |
| Represented By: | Natalie Faye Weiss |
| 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.
