Michael West v. Municipal Court for the City of O'Fallon, Missouri, and Jeremiah

Justia Dockets & Filings Eighth Circuit Missouri Eastern District Michael West v. Municipal Court for the City of O'Fallon, Missouri, and Jeremiah "Jay" Nixon, Attorney General for the State of Missouri.

Michael West v. Municipal Court for the City of O'Fallon, Missouri, and Jeremiah "Jay" Nixon, Attorney General for the State of Missouri.

Case Number:	4:2006cv01126
Filed:	July 24, 2006
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office:	St. Louis Office
Presiding Judge:	Rodney W. Sippel
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
October 3, 2006	Filing 5 ORDER:... In accordance with the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this Court's order and memorandum dated September 14, 2006 [Doc. #2], and this Court's order of dismissal dated September 14, 2006 [Doc. #3], are hereby VACATED. IT IS F URTHER ORDERED that the City of O'Fallon, Missouri;Donna Morrow; Jerry Schulte; Robert M. Wohler; Jane Doe (municipal clerk); and John Doe (prosecuting attorney) are hereby STRICKEN from this action as improper respondents. IT IS FURTHER ORDERE D that the Clerk shall docket thisaction as follows: Michael West v. Municipal Court for the City of O'Fallon, Missouri, and Jeremiah "Jay" Nixon, Attorney General for the State of Missouri. [Case reopened]. Signed by Judge Carol E. Jackson on 10/3/2006. (BDC)
September 14, 2006	Filing 2 ORDER AND MEMORANDUM - In accordance with the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that an order to show cause upon the application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ? 2254 shall not issue. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 is DENIED. An appropriate order shall accompany this order and memorandum. Signed by Judge Carol E. Jackson on 9/14/2006. (JMW)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 3, 2006

Filing 5 ORDER:... In accordance with the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this Court's order and memorandum dated September 14, 2006 [Doc. #2], and this Court's order of dismissal dated September 14, 2006 [Doc. #3], are hereby VACATED. IT IS F URTHER ORDERED that the City of O'Fallon, Missouri;Donna Morrow; Jerry Schulte; Robert M. Wohler; Jane Doe (municipal clerk); and John Doe (prosecuting attorney) are hereby STRICKEN from this action as improper respondents. IT IS FURTHER ORDERE D that the Clerk shall docket thisaction as follows: Michael West v. Municipal Court for the City of O'Fallon, Missouri, and Jeremiah "Jay" Nixon, Attorney General for the State of Missouri. [Case reopened]. Signed by Judge Carol E. Jackson on 10/3/2006. (BDC)

September 14, 2006

Filing 2 ORDER AND MEMORANDUM - In accordance with the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that an order to show cause upon the application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ? 2254 shall not issue. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 is DENIED. An appropriate order shall accompany this order and memorandum. Signed by Judge Carol E. Jackson on 9/14/2006. (JMW)

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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Michael West v. Municipal Court for the City of O'Fallon, Missouri, and Jeremiah "Jay" Nixon, Attorney General for the State of Missouri.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| 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?