Martin v. Warden
Petitioner: Michael D. Martin
Respondent: Warden
Case Number: 8:2020cv03215
Filed: November 5, 2020
Court: US District Court for the District of Maryland
Presiding Judge: George Jarrod Hazel
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on March 11, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 12, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER granting Petitioner 28 days from the date of this Order to supplement the Petition using the provided forms. Signed by Judge George Jarrod Hazel on 11/12/2020. (c/m jj2s, Deputy Clerk)
November 5, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Michael D. Martin. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(jj2s, Deputy Clerk)

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 Maryland District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Martin v. Warden
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Warden
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 ]
Petitioner: Michael D. Martin
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?