Hunter v. Douglas County District Court et al
| Charles Curtis Hunter |
| Douglas County District Court and Kansas, State of |
| 5:2014cv03048 |
| March 31, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Kansas |
| Topeka Office |
| Pawnee |
| 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
15
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 7 and 10 Motions and Requests for investigation; denying 8 Motion to Appoint Counsel; denying 11 Motion to Dismiss. Action is dismissed as second and successive and for lack of Circuit Court pre-authorization as w ell as for the other reasons stated herein and in the court's Memorandum and Order of April 16, 2014. Certificate of appealability denied. Signed by U.S. District Senior Judge Sam A. Crow on 9/11/14. Mailed to pro se party Charles Curtis Hunter by regular mail. (mb)
|
|
Filing
6
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: Petitioner is required to submit his petition for habeas corpus relief upon 2254 forms and to cure all the defects discussed by the court in that form petition. Petitioner's motion 3 for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Petitioner's motion 5 to appoint counsel is denied without prejudice. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 04/16/14. (Mailed to pro se party Charles Curtis Hunter 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.
