Gardner v. State of Nebraska
Petitioner: Justin Gardner
Respondent: State of Nebraska
Interested Party: Nebraska Attorney General
Case Number: 8:2018cv00046
Filed: February 12, 2018
Court: US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Office: 8 Omaha Office
Presiding Judge: Pro Se Docket
Presiding Judge: Richard G. Kopf
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
June 8, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 179 ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Petitioner may not proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. This matter is closed, and Petitioner should refrain from filing any further frivolous appeals.Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL)
April 12, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 170 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis (filing 167) is denied. This matter is closed, and Petitioner should refrain from filing any further frivolous appeals in this court. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL)
January 26, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 161 ORDER - To the extent Petitioner seeks this court's permission to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, his motion (filing 160 ) is denied for the reasons given in the court's January 6, 2022 Memorandum and Order. The Clerk of the Court is directed to transmit Petitioner's Supplemental Notice of Appeal (filing 159 ) and Motion for Leave to Proceed on Appeal in Forma Pauperis (filing 160 ) to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals as a supplement to his Notice of Appeal (filing 153 ). Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party & transmitted to 8th circuit as directed)(LKO)
January 6, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 155 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that Petitioner may not proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. This matter is closed, and Petitioner should refrain from filing any further frivolous appeals. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LAC)
September 7, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 144 ORDER that Petitioner's "Petition for Permission to Appeal" (Filing 142 ), construed as a motion, is denied. This matter is already pending on appeal before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LAC)
July 19, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 136 ORDER that Petitioner's Motion for Leave to Proceed on Appeal In Forma Pauperis (filing 133 ) is denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LAC)
June 17, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 128 ORDER - that Petitioner may not proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LKO)
June 1, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 125 ORDER: The Notice of Appeal to USCA 123 regarding filing 118 construed as a motion to appeal in forma pauperis is denied as it is not taken in good faith. No certificate of appealability will be issued. The Clerk shall not process the appeal but shall send a copy of this Order to the Clerk of the Court of Appeals and Mr. Gardner. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copies mailed as directed) (ADB)
May 20, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 118 ORDER - that Petitioner's Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis (Filing 112 ) is not taken in good faith and is denied. Petitioner's Request for Transcript (Filing 114 ) and Notice of Subpoena (Filing 115 ) are denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LKO)
April 27, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 100 ORDER - that the application (Filing 94 ) and the motion to vacate (Filing 96 ) are denied. The Clerk shall provide the Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals of the Eighth Circuit with a copy of this order. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Regenerated to the 8th Circuit)(LKO)
March 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 88 ORDER The Clerk of this Court shall not process the Notice of Appeal (Filing 81 ) but shall provide the Clerk of the Court of Appeals with a copy of this order. The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Filing 83 ) is denied. The various motions related to this appeal (Filings 85 , 86 , 87 ) are denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LRM)
May 17, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 70 ORDER that the Clerk of this Court shall not process the notice of appeal 68 , but shall provide the Clerk of the Court of Appeals with a copy of this Order. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (copy provided to USCA clerk) (MBM)
January 28, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 58 ORDER that the notice of appeal construed as a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (filing no. 56 ) is denied. The Clerk shall send a copy of this order to the Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LAC)
December 17, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 49 ORDER that that the Petitioner's motion (filing no. 48 ), construed to be a motion to appeal in forma pauperis, is granted. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LAC)
August 28, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 42 ORDER that Petitioner's Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis 41 is granted. The clerk's office is directed to provide the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals with a copy of this order. The Petitioner's motion for evidentiary hearing 40 is denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party and provided to circuit)(MBM)
August 21, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 34 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Petitioner is advised that if he wishes to appeal the denial and dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, a separate notice of appeal must be filed. To avoid confusion, the notice of appeal should specifically refer to the memorandum and order and judgment denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus. If Petitioner wishes to proceed in forma pauperis on the appeal of the denial and dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, he must submit a separate application to proceed in forma pampers. The Clerk shall mail to Petitioner a copy of the form for the application to proceed in forma pampers. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party w/ application proceed IFP) (LKO)
May 9, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER that Petitioner's Motion to Appoint Legal Counsel (Filing No. 6 ) is denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LAC)
March 26, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER that 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 court. By May 10, 2018, 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: May 10, 2018: deadline fo r Respondent to file state court records in support of answer or motion for summary judgment. If Respondent elects to file a motion for summary judgment, the following procedures must be followed by Respondent and Petitioner. If Respondent elects t o 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: June 11, 2018: check for Respondent'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 Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LAC)
February 14, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER that the Petitioner is directed to submit the $5.00 fee to the clerk's office or submit a request to proceed in forma pauperis within 30 days. Failure to take either action will result in dismissal of this matter without further not ice. The clerk of the court is directed to send to Petitioner the Form AO240 "Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit"). The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this matter with the following text: March 16, 2018: Check for MIFP or payment. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LAC)
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: Gardner 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: Justin Gardner
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?