Robinson v. USA
| Shawn Donnell Robinson |
| USA |
| 4:2022cv00071 |
| January 19, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| Henry Edward Autrey |
| Prisoner: Vacate Sentence |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 1, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (See Full Order) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movants motion for extension of time to file his response to the Order to Show Cause [ECF No. #3 ] is GRANTED IN PART. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that movant shall show cause, in writing, no later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Memorandum and Order, why his motion to vacate brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255, should not be dismissed as time- barred. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if movant fails to comply with this Memorandum and Order, his motion to vacate will be dismissed without further proceedings. (Response to Court due by 3/30/2022). Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 3/1/2022. (JEB)
|
|
ORDER RECEIPT: (see receipt) Docket No: 4. Copy sent to non-electronic party on this date. Tue Mar 1 11:50:09 CST 2022 (Bailey, Jennifer)
|
|
Filing 3
MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response by Petitioner Shawn Donnell Robinson. (JEB)
|
|
Filing 2
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movant shall show cause, in writing and no later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, why the instant 2255 motion should not be dismissed as time-barred. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if movant fails to comply with this Order, his 2255 motion will be dismissed without further proceedings. Show Cause Response due by 2/28/2022. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on January 27, 2022. (MCB)
|
|
ORDER RECEIPT: (see receipt) Docket No: 2. sent to non-electronic party this date. Thu Jan 27 15:07:25 CST 2022 (Berg, Melanie)
|
|
***Complaint Letter Created. This is to advise you that this office has received and filed your complaint and has assigned it the above-referenced case number. (DJO)
|
|
Case Opening Notification. Judge Assigned: Honorable Henry E. Autrey. (DJO)
|
|
***Complaint Letter Processed (see notice of electronic filing for distribution list) Thu Jan 20 11:01:17 CST 2022 (admin,)
|
|
Filing 1
MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. 2255 TO VACATE, SET ASIDE, OR CORRECT SENTENCE BY A PERSON IN FEDERAL CUSTODY by Petitioner Shawn Donnell Robinson. (Attachments: #1 Correspondence, #2 Attachment, #3 Exhibit, #4 Original Filing Form, #5 Envelope)(DJO)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Robinson v. USA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Shawn Donnell Robinson | |
| 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: USA | |
| Represented By: | Stephen R. Casey |
| 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.
