Engstrom v. Franks
| Michael Engstrom |
| Scott Franks |
| Nebraska Attorney General |
| 8:2017cv00166 |
| May 15, 2017 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| 8 Omaha Office |
| Pro Se Docket |
| Richard G. Kopf |
| Habeas Corpus: General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
17
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER the petition for a writ of habeas corpus (filing no. 1 ) is denied and dismissed with prejudice. A separate judgment will be issued. However, no certificate of appealability will be issued. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LAC)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER that since case number 8:17CV166 attacks two separate convictions in two separate courts, but only one petition was filed, the Clerk shall open a new case and file this order in the new civil case as well as in 8:17CV166. It is unnecessary to copy any of the filings from 8:17CV166 to the new case. The Court will take judicial notice of all such filings as of today's date for purposes of resolving the new case. All subsequent filings shall be placed in both cases. No separate filing fee shall be collected. The undersigned will consider the new case to have been filed on May 15, 2017, for purposes of the statute of limitations. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LAC)
|
|
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Upon initial review of the Petition (Filing No. 1 ), the court preliminarily determines that Petitioner's claims are potentially cognizable in federal court. By July 3, 2017, Respondent must file a motion for summary ju dgment 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: July 3, 2017: deadline for Respondent to file state court records in support o f answer or motion for summary judgment. If Respondent elects to file a motion for summary judgment, thefollowing procedures must be followed by Respondent and Petitioner. If Respondent elects to file an answer, the following procedures must be followed by Respondent and Petitioner.The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: August 2, 2017: check for Respondents 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 Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LAC,)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER 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 Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LAC)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
