McCray v. Frakes
| Samuel McCray |
| State of Nebraska and Scott R. Frakes |
| Nebraska Attorney General |
| 8:2021cv00007 |
| January 6, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| Pro Se Docket |
| Richard G Kopf |
| Habeas Corpus: General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 14, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER - that Respondent's Motion to Substitute Respondent (Filing #10 ) is granted. Scott R. Frakes, the Director of the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services, shall be the sole respondent in this case Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LKO)
|
| Filing 10 MOTION to Substitute Party by Attorney Erin E. Tangeman on behalf of Respondent State of Nebraska.(Tangeman, Erin) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Attorney Erin E. Tangeman on behalf of Respondent State of Nebraska (Tangeman, Erin) |
|
Filing 8
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Upon initial review of the habeas corpus petition (Filing 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 March 19, 2021, 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: March 19, 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: April 19, 2021: 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)(TCL)
|
| FILING FEE PAID on behalf of Petitioner Samuel McCray. Receipt number 8059034, in the amount of $ 5.00. (LRM) |
|
Filing 7
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Petitioner's request to proceed IFP (Filing #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 without further notice. The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: February 22, 2021: 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)(LKO)
|
| Filing 6 PRISONER ACCOUNT STATEMENT by Petitioner Samuel McCray. ACCESS TO THE PDF DOCUMENT IS RESTRICTED TO CASE PARTICIPANTS AND THE COURT PURSUANT TO THE E-GOVERNMENT ACT AND FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 5.2(a). (LKO) |
| Filing 5 LETTER by Clerk requesting plaintiff's trust account statement from institution. Letter mailed to Nebraska Department of Correctional Services. (LKO) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE by Clerk acknowledging receipt of complaint filed by a pro se party. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LKO) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis on behalf of Petitioner Samuel McCray. (LKO) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed on behalf of pro se petitioner Samuel McCray. (LKO) |
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.
