CRUMBLE v. WARDEN
| MARCUS CRUMBLE |
| WARDEN |
| 2:2019cv00337 |
| July 15, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| James Patrick Hanlon |
| 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 August 19, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 FINAL JUDGMENT - The Court now enters final judgment. Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied and the action is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 8/19/2019. (DMW) |
Filing 7
Order Denying Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus and Denying a Certificate of Appealability - Petitioner Marcus Crumble was convicted in 2002 of burglary and carjacking in Marion Superior Court, Case No. 49G03-0112-FB-218312. Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254, arguing that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance in violation of his Sixth Amendment rights. Reasonable jurists could not disagree that Petitioner's habeas petition is barred by the statute of limitations. Therefore, a certificate of appealability is denied. (See Order.) Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 8/19/2019. (DMW)
|
| Filing 6 RESPONSE re #5 Order to Show Cause, filed by Petitioner MARCUS CRUMBLE. (DMW) |
|
Filing 5
Order to Show Cause and Granting Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis - Petitioner shall have through August 14, 2019, in which to show cause why his petition should not be dismissed as time-barred. Petitioner's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. #3 , is granted. (See Order.) Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 7/16/2019. (DMW)
|
| Filing 4 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (REO) |
| Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Petitioner MARCUS CRUMBLE. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit - Statement of Inmate Trust Fund Account)(REO) |
| Filing 2 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by MARCUS CRUMBLE. (No fee paid with this filing) (REO) |
| Filing 1 CONSENT to Prisoner E-Service by MARCUS CRUMBLE located at WVCF. Pursuant to General Order 2013-1, documents submitted by MARCUS CRUMBLE 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: CRUMBLE 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 | |
| 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: MARCUS CRUMBLE | |
| 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.
