Randle v. USA
| Maurice L. Randle |
| USA |
| 4:2023cv01169 |
| September 18, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| Henry Edward Autrey |
| Prisoner: Vacate Sentence |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 13, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER OF DISMISSAL. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movant's motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 is DENIED AND DISMISSED as time barred. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court will not issue a certificate of appealability. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 10/13/23. (EAB)
|
|
Filing 4
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (See Full Order). IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movant's motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence is DENIED AND DISMISSED as time barred. See Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Proceedings. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court will not issue a Certificate of Appealability. See 28 U.S.C. 2253. An Order of Dismissal will accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 10/13/23. (EAB)
|
|
ORDER RECEIPT: (see receipt) Docket No: 4, 5. copy sent to non-electronic party on this date. Fri Oct 13 12:21:46 CDT 2023 (Brown, Erica)
|
|
Filing 3
RESPONSE to Show Cause Order by Petitioner Maurice L. Randle. (JEB)
|
|
Filing 2
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: (See Full Order.) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movant shall show cause, in writing and no later than twenty-one (21) 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 10/12/2023.) Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 9/21/2023. (JEB)
|
|
ORDER RECEIPT: (see receipt) Docket No: 2. Copy sent to non-electronic party on this date. Thu Sep 21 12:00:41 CDT 2023 (Bailey, Jennifer)
|
|
Case Opening Notification. Judge Assigned: Honorable Henry Edward Autrey. (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) Tue Sep 19 11:00:46 CDT 2023 (admin,)
|
|
Filing 1
MOTION to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence by Petitioner Maurice L. Randle. (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: Randle 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: Maurice L. Randle | |
| 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: | Jennifer J. Roy |
| 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.
