Allee v. Warden of USP McCreary et al
| Justin James Allee |
| State of Nebraska and Warden of USP McCreary |
| Nebraska Attorney General |
| 8:2017cv00455 |
| November 27, 2017 |
| US 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
20
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - the letter, treated as a motion for reconsideration (filing no. 19 ) is denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LKO)
|
|
Filing
17
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - that the habeas corpus petition (filing no. 1 ) is denied and dismissed without prejudice. No certificate of appealability has been or will be issued. Judgment will be issued by separate document. Additionally, the motion for dismissal (filing no. 13 ) is granted and the motion to strike and motion for default (filing 16 ) is denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LKO)
|
|
Filing
15
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (filing no. 12 , part 1) is denied without prejudice to reassertion. Petitioner's Motion to be Moved (filing no. 12 , part 2) is denied. Petitioner shall have thirty (3 0) days from the date of this order to file a brief in opposition to the motion to dismiss. The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: June 14, 2018: check for Petitioner's brief in opposition to motion to dismiss. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LKO)
|
|
Filing
11
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Respondents' Motion to Substitute Respondent (filing no. 10 ) is granted. The clerk's office is directed to update the court's records to reflect that Scott R. Frakes is the proper respondent in this action. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LKO)
|
|
Filing
9
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Upon initial review of the habeas corpus petition (Filing No. 1 ), the court preliminarily determines that Petitioner's claims, as they are set forth in this Memorandum and Order, are potentially cognizable in federal cou rt. By May 18, 2018, Respondents 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: May 18, 2018: deadline for Respondents 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: June 18, 2018: check for Respondents' answer and separate brief. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (KLF)
|
|
Filing
6
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Petitioner's request to proceed IFP (Filing No. 2 ) is denied. Petitioner must pay the $5.00 filing fee within 30 days. Petitioner is warned that if the fee is not paid as required, the court may dismiss this case wi thout further notice. The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: January 3, 2018: deadline for Petitioner to pay $5.00 filing fee. No further review of this case will take place until the filing fee is paid. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party; e-mailed to Finance) (KLF)
|
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 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.
