Allen v. Adams
| Chester Dean Allen |
| Brad Adams |
| 7:2020cv00093 |
| July 9, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| Candace J Smith |
| Gregory F VanTatenhove |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 25, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: IT IS RECOMMENDED that: 1) Allen's 2254 Petition #1 be dismissed; 2) Allen's application to proceed in forma pauperis #3 in this action be denied as moot; 3) a certificate of appealability be denied by District Court in conjunction with Court's entry of its final order in this matter; 4) Judgment in favor of Respondent be entered contemporaneously with District Court's entry of its final order; and 5) this case be stricken from active docket of this Court. Within 14 days, any party may serve and file specific written objections to any or all findings. Signed by Magistrate Judge Candace J. Smith on 8/31/2020. (RCB)cc: COR and Chester Dean Allen by US Mail
|
| Filing 5 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 Page) (TDA) |
| Filing 4 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement by Chester Dean Allen pro se. (TDA) |
| Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Chester Dean Allen pro se. Motions referred to Candace J. Smith. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (TDA) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Chester Dean Allen pro se. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support, #2 Appendix A - Judgment & Sentence, #3 Appendix B - Supreme Court Memo Opinion, #4 Appendix C - Order Denying Pet to Vacate, #5 Appendix D - Order Affirming COA, #6 Appendix E - Order Denying Mtn Hold Abeyance, #7 Appendix F - KY Supreme Court Order Denying Review, #8 Appendix G - COA Notice, #9 Appendix H - KY Supreme Court Notice, #10 Appendix I - Proof of Timeliness, #11 Envelope Postmarked 7/7/2020) NOTE: Page indicated in main document as 20C not included. (TDA) |
| Conflict Check run. (TDA) |
| ***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Smith for review: re #3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Chester Dean Allen. (TDA) |
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: Allen v. Adams | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Chester Dean Allen | |
| 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: Brad Adams | |
| 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.
