Powell v. Heimgartner et al
| Richard T. Powell |
| James Heimgartner and Steve Six |
| 5:2012cv03119 |
| May 16, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Kansas |
| Topeka Office |
| Butler |
| Sam A. Crow |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
21
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: Respondents' motion 12 to dismiss is denied. Respondents are granted to and including September 6, 2013, to address the merits of the petition. The clerk of the court shall return the state court records to the respondent. Counsel for petitioner shall remain appointed to assist him unless the court grants permission to withdraw from this matter upon motion of counsel. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 7/31/2013. (smnd)
|
|
Filing
15
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: Petitioner's motions 12 & 13 for the appointment of counsel are granted. Petitioner's motion 13 for evidentiary hearing is denied. Respondents shall cause to be forwarded to the clerk of the court the records and transcripts of the criminal proceedings challenged by the petitioner, including appellate and post-conviction records. Petitioner's motion 14 for an extension of time is granted. Counsel for petitioner is granted to and including May 6, 2013, to file a response to the motion to dismiss. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 3/6/2013. (Mailed to pro se party Richard T. Powell by regular mail.) (smnd)
|
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 Kansas 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
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.
