Jackson v. Frakes
| Michael W. Jackson |
| Scott Frakes |
| Nebraska Attorney General |
| 8:2020cv00458 |
| November 2, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| Pro Se Docket |
| Richard G Kopf |
| Habeas Corpus: General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 31, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The clerk of the court is directed to add the Nebraska Attorney General as an Interested Party and provide a copy of this order, along with copies of the habeas petition (filing #1 ) and the court's November 3, 2020 Memorandum and Order (filing #3 ), to the Nebraska Attorney General. On the court's own motion, Respondent shall have until January 4, 2021, to 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: January 4, 2021: 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: February 3, 2021: check for Respondents' answer and separate brief. The clerk of the court is directed to terminate the prior pro se case management deadlines of December 18, 2020, and January 19, 2021. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LKO)
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER - that Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Filing #4 ) is denied without prejudice to reassertion. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LKO)
|
| Filing 4 MOTION to Appoint Counsel on behalf of Petitioner Michael W. Jackson. (LKO) |
|
Filing 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Upon initial review of the habeas corpus petition Filing #1 , the court preliminarily determines that Petitioners claims, as they are set forth in this Memorandum and Order, are potentially cognizable in federal court. By December 18, 2020, 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: December 18, 2020: deadline for Respondent to file state court records in support of answer or motion for summary judgment. If the motion for summary judgment is denied, Respondent must file an answer, a designation and a brief that complies with terms of this order. (See the following paragraph.) The documents must be filed no later than 30 days after the denial of the motion for summary judgment. Respondent is warned that failure to filean answer, a designation and a brief in a timely fashion may result in the imposition of sanctions, including Petitioners release. The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: January 19, 2021: 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)(LKO)
|
| Filing 2 NOTICE by Clerk acknowledging receipt of complaint filed by a pro se party. (MKR) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus with receipt number 8058145 in the amount of $ 5 filed by pro se petitioner Michael W. Jackson. (MKR) |
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 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.
