Clayborne v. State of Nebraska
Petitioner: Robert E. Clayborne, Jr.
Respondent: State of Nebraska
Interested Party: Nebraska Attorney General
Case Number: 8:2015cv00378
Filed: October 16, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Office: 8 Omaha Office
Presiding Judge: Joseph F. Bataillon
Presiding Judge: Pro Se Docket
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
January 21, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 90 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Petitioner's Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis (filing 87 ) is granted. Petitioner's Motion for Order of Designation of Record on Appeal (filing 89 ) is denied as moot. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (LKO)
January 10, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 85 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4), (6) (filing 83 ), is denied. No certificate of appealability will be issued. Petitioner's pending Motion for Status (filing 84 ) is denied as moot. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)
October 2, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 76 ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), I certify that the appeal is not taken in good faith. Petitioner's Motion for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis (filing 75) is, therefore, denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL)
June 21, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 58 ORDER - that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), I certify that the appeal is not taken in good faith. The Clerk shall provide the Clerk of the Court of Appeals with a copy of this Memorandum and order and follow its normal practice in cases such as this one. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LKO)
January 16, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 40 ORDER - that Petitioner's Motion to Amend Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (filing no. 38 ) is denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (KLF)
August 22, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 32 ORDER - that the Petitioner's Motion For Leave To Appeal In Forma Pauperis (filing no. 31 ) is granted. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (KLF)
June 3, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 22 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that: This case is dismissed with prejudice and the court will not issue a certificate of appealability. I will enter judgment by a separate document. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL)
March 9, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 11 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying without prejudice to reassertion 10 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (JSF)
February 16, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 8 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: The clerk of the court is directed to mail copies of this Memorandum and Order and the habeas corpus petition to Respondent and the Nebraska Attorney General by regular first-class mail. By April 1, 2016, Respondent must file a motion for summary judgment or state court records in support of an answer. The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: April 1, 2016: deadline for Respondent to file state court records in support of answer or motion for summary judgment. The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: May 3, 2016: check for Respondent& #039;s answer and separate brief. No discovery shall be undertaken without leave of the court. See Rule 6 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copies mailed as directed and to pro se party)(TCL )
October 28, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 7 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Petitioner's Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (Filing No. 2 ) is granted. The next step in this case is for the court to conduct a preliminary review of the habeas corpus petition in accordance with Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 cases. The court will conduct this review in its normal course of business. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL)
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 Nebraska District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Clayborne v. State of Nebraska
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Robert E. Clayborne, Jr.
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 ]
Interested party: Nebraska Attorney General
Represented By: Douglas J. Peterson
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: State of Nebraska
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?