WILLIAMS v. WARDEN
| DEREK FRANKLIN WILLIAMS |
| WARDEN |
| 2:2018cv00399 |
| September 10, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| William T Lawrence |
| Doris L Pryor |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 4, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 Correspondence REQUESTING COPY of Case Document #3, filed by Derek Williams. (Attachments: #1 Envelope, #2 Docket Entry #3) (RSF) |
Filing 8
Order Granting Motion to Correct Error - Petitioner Derek Williams' motion to correct error, Dkt. No. #7 , is granted. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 10/9/2018. (DMW)
|
| Filing 7 MOTION to Correct Errors re #2 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Petitioner DEREK FRANKLIN WILLIAMS. (DMW) |
| Filing 6 RECEIPT #IP062195 for Writ of Habeas Corpus fee in the amount of $5.00, paid by Petitioner. (HET) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Andrew A. Kobe on behalf of Respondent WARDEN. (Kobe, Andrew) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - Derek Franklin Williams' petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenges his conviction and sentence in State Court case number 14D01- 1102-MR-0141. The petitioner shall have through October 15, 2018, in which to either pay the $5.00 filing fee for this action or demonstrate his financial inability to do so. The respondent is ORDERED to enter an appearance by September 27, 2018. The respondent is further ORDERED to answer the petition by November 15, 2018. The petitioner shall have 28 days to reply to the return to the order to show cause. (See Order.) Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 9/14/2018. (DMW)
|
| Filing 3 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (REO) |
| Filing 2 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by DEREK FRANKLIN WILLIAMS. (No fee paid with this filing) (REO) |
| Filing 1 CONSENT to Prisoner E-Service by DEREK FRANKLIN WILLIAMS located at WVCF. Pursuant to General Order 2013-1, documents submitted by DEREK FRANKLIN WILLIAMS to the court for filing will generate a Notice of Electronic Filing that will constitute official service upon registered users of CM/ECF. If any parties to the case are not registered CM/ECF users, the Clerk of the Court will mail the document via U.S. Postal Service on behalf of the inmate. NOTE: The E-Filing Program does not affect the obligation of other parties to serve copies of documents in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (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
| Search for this case: WILLIAMS v. WARDEN | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: WARDEN | |
| Represented By: | Andrew A. Kobe |
| 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 ] |
| Petitioner: DEREK FRANKLIN WILLIAMS | |
| 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.
