Roedel v. Coffey County Jail
Petitioner: Roger Roedel
Respondent: Coffey County Jail
Case Number: 5:2015cv03120
Filed: May 18, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Kansas
Office: Topeka Office
County: Coffey
Presiding Judge: Sam A. Crow
Presiding Judge: David J. Waxse
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 29, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 5 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: Petitioner's motion 2 for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this habeas corpus action is granted. Petitioner's motion 4 for appointment of counsel is denied without prejudice. The petition is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 07/29/15. Mailed to pro se party Roger Roedel by regular mail. (smnd)
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 Kansas District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Roedel v. Coffey County Jail
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Roger Roedel
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 ]
Respondent: Coffey County Jail
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.


Why Is My Information Online?