Brown v. Vandergriff
Roy Brown |
David Vandergriff |
4:2022cv00755 |
July 14, 2022 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
Henry Edward Autrey |
Nannette A Baker |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on August 30, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
ORDER RECEIPT: (see receipt) Docket No: 9. Copy sent to non-electronic party on this date. Tue Aug 30 10:52:50 CDT 2022 (Bailey, Jennifer) |
Filing 9 CJRA ORDER (GJL). Magistrate Judge Nannette A. Baker termed. Case reassigned to District Judge Henry Edward Autrey for all further proceedings. (HMA) |
Filing 8 Letter from Clerk sent to Petitioner Roy Brown re: Failure to file Notice Regarding Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Notice re: Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction due by 8/26/2022. (Attachments: #1 Attachment Notice Regarding Magistrate Jurisdiction) (HMA) |
ORDER RECEIPT: (see receipt) Docket No: 8. copy sent to non-electronic party on this date. Tue Aug 16 08:39:10 CDT 2022 (Aubuchon, Heather) |
Filing 7 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Respondent David Vandergriff filed by Respondent David Vandergriff. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A - Direct Appeal Transcript, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B - Appellant's Brief, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C - Direct Appeal Respondent's Brief, #4 Exhibit Exhibit D - Direct Appeal Appellant's Reply Brief, #5 Exhibit Exhibit E - Direct Appeal Opinion, #6 Exhibit Exhibit F - Appellant's Opinion, #7 Exhibit Exhibit G - Motion Court Memorandum, #8 Exhibit Exhibit H - Appellant's Brief, #9 Exhibit Exhibit I - Respondent's Brief, #10 Exhibit Exhibit J - Appellant's Reply Brief, #11 Exhibit Exhibit K - Memorandum, #12 Exhibit Exhibit L - Mandate)(Kweskin, Benjamin) |
Filing 6 ENTRY of Appearance by Benjamin Jared Kweskin for Respondent David Vandergriff. (Kweskin, Benjamin) |
Filing 5 CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER (See Full Order) This case is assigned to Track: 4. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the following provisions apply in this case, and will be modified only upon a showing of exceptional circumstances: This case has been randomly assigned to a United States Magistrate Judge. The parties have twenty-one (21) days from their entry of appearance to file their Notice Regarding Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction forms. Respondent must show cause, in writing and within forty-five (45) days of the date of this order, why the relief requested in the instant petition should not be granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if Petitioner chooses to file a reply to Respondents answer to the petition, the reply must be filed within sixty (60) days of the date the answer to the petition is filed. If Petitioner fails to timely file a reply, the right to file such a reply must be waived. See Rule 5(e) of Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. (Show Cause Response due by 9/2/2022). Signed by Magistrate Judge Nannette A. Baker on 7/19/22. (EAB) |
Filing 4 ORDER. This matter is before the Court upon petitioner Roy Brown's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court has reviewed the motion, and concludes that petitioner is unable to pay the filing fee. The Court will therefore grant the motion. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner Roy Brown's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. #2 ) is GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nannette A. Baker on 7/19/22. (EAB) |
ORDER RECEIPT: (see receipt) Docket No: 4, 5. copy sent to non-electronic party on this date. Tue Jul 19 14:22:59 CDT 2022 (Brown, Erica) |
Filing 3 Pursuant to Local Rule 2.08, the assigned/referred magistrate judge is designated and authorized by the court to exercise full authority in this assigned/referred action or matter under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636 and 18 U.S.C Sec. 3401, including any case budgeting matters. (Potter, Jacob) |
Case Opening Notification. Judge Assigned: Honorable Nannette A. Baker. All parties must file the Notice Regarding Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form consenting to or opting out of the Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. Click #here for the instructions. (JWD) |
***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. (JWD) |
***Complaint Letter Processed (see notice of electronic filing for distribution list) Fri Jul 15 11:00:54 CDT 2022 (admin,) |
Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Petitioner Roy Brown. (JWD) |
Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Petitioner Roy Brown. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(JWD) |
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: Brown v. Vandergriff | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: Roy Brown | |
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: David Vandergriff | |
Represented By: | Office of Missouri Attorney General - Habeas Division |
Represented By: | Benjamin Jared Kweskin |
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.