Morgan (ID 76445) v. Kansas, State of
| Aaron Lee Morgan |
| Kansas, State of and Attorney General of Kansas |
| 5:2012cv03217 |
| October 10, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Kansas |
| Topeka Office |
| Ellsworth |
| Sam A. Crow |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| 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
8
ORDER ENTERED: Petitioner's motion 7 for extension of time is denied. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed as time-barred. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 2/27/2013. (Mailed to pro se party Aaron Lee Morgan by regular mail.) (smnd)
|
|
Filing
5
ORDER ENTERED: Petitioner is granted thirty (30) days in which to show cause why this petition for writ of habeas corpus should not be dismissed as time barred under 28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(1). Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 12/5/2012. (Mailed to pro se party Aaron Lee Morgan by regular mail.) (smnd)
|
|
Filing
3
ORDER ENTERED: Petitioner is granted 30 days to submit his petition upon court-approved forms and to cure the deficiencies found in his original petition. Petitioner's "Declaration in Support of Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis" (Doc. 2) is deficient and is denied as moot as filing fee has been paid. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 10/29/2012. (Mailed to pro se party Eugene Keltner by regular mail.) (mb)
|
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.
