Hodge v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
| Tony C. Hodge |
| Commonwealth of Kentucky |
| 5:2019cv00255 |
| June 21, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| Karen K Caldwell |
| Hanly A Ingram |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 8, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Kenneth W. Riggs on behalf of Commonwealth of Kentucky (Riggs, Kenneth) |
| Filing 7 OBJECTION to #6 Report and Recommendations filed by Tony C. Hodge (Pro se). (Attachments: #1 Env postmarked 7/26/2019)(SLH) |
| ***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Caldwell for review: re #6 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Tony C. Hodge (SLH) |
| Filing 6 RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION: RECOMMENDS Hodge's #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be DISMISSED upon initial review; further RECOMMENDS no Certificate of Appealability issue. Objections to R&R due w/in 14 days.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Hanly A. Ingram on 7/22/2019.(STC)cc: Petitioner |
| Filing 5 RESPONSE re #4 Order filed by Tony C. Hodge, pro se. Styled as Petitioner's Show Cause Motion to Court Ordered. (Attachments: #1 Envelope postmarked 7/11/2019)(KM) |
| ***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Magistrate Judge Hanly A. Ingram for review: #5 Response (KM) |
Filing 4
ORDER: by no later than Friday, July 26, 2019, Petitioner shall SHOW CAUSE why this matter should not be dismissed as untimely. Petitioner's response to this show cause order SHALL be strictly limited to the issue of the timeliness of his petition. If Petitioner fails to provide a sufficient basis in law or fact to toll the limitations period, including through equitable tolling, the Court, on this record, will recommend that the 2254 petition be dismissed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Hanly A. Ingram on 6/24/2019.(STC)cc: Petitioner
|
| Filing 3 IMPORTANT NOTICE to Pro Se Filer: Information relating to pro se filings and F.R.Civ.P. 5.2 requiring personal identifiers be partially redacted from documents filed with the court. #Click here for more information on the rules. It is the sole responsibility of counsel and the parties to comply with the rules requiring redaction of personal data identifiers.cc: pro se filer via U.S. Mail (Attachments: #1 Sample Caption)(STC) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Tony C. Hodge, pro se. (Attachments: #1 Envelope postmarked 6 18 2019)(STC) |
| Conflict Check run. (STC) |
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 Kentucky Eastern 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: Hodge v. Commonwealth of Kentucky | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Tony C. Hodge | |
| 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: Commonwealth of Kentucky | |
| Represented By: | Kenneth W. Riggs |
| 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.
