RODRIGUEZ v. WARDEN
| RICKY LEE RODRIGUEZ |
| WARDEN |
| 2:2018cv00356 |
| August 14, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Terre Haute Office |
| William T Lawrence |
| Doris L Pryor |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 18, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
ORDER - Granting #8 Respondent's motion for a sixty (60) day extension of time to respond to the Petitioner's motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241. The Respondent shall have to and including November 26, 2018, to file its response to the 2241 motion. Copy to Petitioner via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 10/1/2018. (DMW)
|
| Filing 8 MOTION for Extension of Time to November 26, 2018 in which to #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, #2 Brief(Habeas) , filed by Respondent WARDEN. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Wood, James) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by James Robert Wood on behalf of Respondent WARDEN. (Wood, James) |
| Filing 6 RECEIPT #IP061856 for Habeas filing fee in the amount of $5.00, paid by Petitioner. (REO) |
| Filing 5 CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by RICKY LEE RODRIGUEZ. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(DWH) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - The United States is notified of the filing of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241 and of the supporting memorandum. This material has been scanned into the Court's electronic docket. A copy of this Entry and Order to Show Cause shall be distributed to the United States Attorney. The respondent shall have until September 27, 2018, in which to answer the allegations of the habeas petition, and in doing so shall show cause why the relief sought by the petitioner should not be granted. The petitioner shall have twenty-eight days, in which to either pay the $5.00 filing fee or demonstrate his financial inability to do so. (See Order.) Copy to Petitioner via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 8/20/2018. (DMW)
|
| Filing 3 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (DJH) |
| Filing 2 Brief re #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by RICKY LEE RODRIGUEZ. (Attachments: #1 exhibits including court records, Offender Profile, and criminal incidents report, #2 Envelope)(DJH) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by RICKY LEE RODRIGUEZ. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A letter, #2 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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: RODRIGUEZ 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: RICKY LEE RODRIGUEZ | |
| 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: | James Robert Wood |
| 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.
