Smith v. Jamison
| Rodney Smith |
| Warden J. Jamison |
| 7:2024cv07884 |
| October 7, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Jessica G L Clarke |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 3, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
HABEAS PACKAGE MAILED to Rodney Smith 51314-066 F.C.I. Otisville PO Box 1000 Otisville, NY 10963, at, on 12/3/2024 Re: #6 Order to Answer, 28 U.S.C. 2241,. The following document(s) were enclosed in the Service Package: a copy of the order of service or order to answer and other orders entered to date, the individual practices of the district judge and magistrate judge assigned to your case, Instructions for Litigants Who Do Not Have Attorneys, Notice Regarding Privacy and Public Access to Electronic Case Files, a Motions guide, a notice that the Pro Se Manual has been discontinued, a Notice of Change of Address form to use if your contact information changes, a handout explaining matters handled by magistrate judges and consent form to complete if all parties agree to proceed for all purposes before the magistrate judge. (nb)
|
| MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 6. Mailed to: Rodney Smith 51314-066 F.C.I. Otisville PO Box 1000 Otisville, NY 10963. |
|
Filing 6
ORDER TO ANSWER, 28 U.S.C. 2241: The Court, having examined the petition in this action, which Petitioner filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241, hereby ORDERS that: The Clerk of Court shall electronically notify the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York that this order has been issued. Within sixty days of the date of this order, the U.S. Attorneys Office shall file an answer or other pleadings in response to the petition. Petitioner may file reply papers, if any, within thirty days from the date Petitioner is served with Respondents answer. SO ORDERED. J. Jamison answer due on 1/24/2025. (Signed by Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke on 11/25/2024) (tg)
|
| NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT to Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke. Judge Laura Taylor Swain is no longer assigned to the case. (vba) |
| Magistrate Judge Victoria Reznik is designated to handle matters that may be referred in this case. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (vba) |
| Pro Se Payment of Fee Processed: $5.00 Check processed by the Finance Department on 11/13/2024, Receipt Number 34541. (je) |
| Filing 4 LETTER addressed to Clerk dated 10/29/24 re: filing fee sent and requesting notification if it was received. Document filed by Rodney Smith.(jbo) |
| MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 2. Mailed to: Rodney Smith 51314-066 F.C.I. Otisville PO Box 1000 Otisville, NY 10963. (anc) |
| MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 3. Mailed to: Rodney Smith 51314-066 F.C.I. Otisville PO Box 1000 Otisville, NY 10963. (anc) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER DIRECTING PAYMENT OF FEE OR IFP APPLICATION: Plaintiff is directed to render payment of the $5.00 filing fee or submit an IFP application to this Court's Pro Se Office within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. The Clerk of Court is directed to assign this matter to my docket. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). Filing Fee due by 11/18/2024. In Forma Pauperis (IFP) Application due by 11/18/2024. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 10/18/2024) (Attachments: #1 IFP Application) (keb)
|
|
Filing 2
STANDING ORDER IN RE CASES FILED BY PRO SE PLAINTIFFS (See 24-MISC-127 Standing Order filed March 18, 2024). To ensure that all cases heard in the Southern District of New York are handled promptly and efficiently, all parties must keep the court apprised of any new contact information. It is a party's obligation to provide an address for service; service of court orders cannot be accomplished if a party does not update the court when a change of address occurs. Accordingly, all self-represented litigants are hereby ORDERED to inform the court of each change in their address or electronic contact information. Parties may #consent to electronic service to receive notifications of court filings by email, rather than relying on regular mail delivery. Parties may also ask the court for #permission to file documents electronically. Forms, including instructions for consenting to electronic service and requesting permission to file documents electronically, may be found by clicking on the hyperlinks in this order, or by accessing the forms on the courts website, nysd.uscourts.gov/forms. The procedures that follow apply only to cases filed by pro se plaintiffs. If the court receives notice from the United States Postal Service that an order has been returned to the court, or otherwise receives information that the address of record for a self-represented plaintiff is no longer valid, the court may issue an Order to Show Cause why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with this order. Such order will be sent to the plaintiffs last known address and will also be viewable on the court's electronic docket. A notice directing the parties' attention to this order shall be docketed (and mailed to any self-represented party that has appeared and has not consented to electronic service) upon the opening of each case or miscellaneous matter that is classified as pro se in the court's records. (Signed by Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 3/18/2024) (tro)
|
| CASE MANAGEMENT NOTE: For each electronic filing made in a case involving a self-represented party who has not consented to electronic service, the filing party must serve the document on such self-represented party in a manner permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2) (other than through the ECF system) and file proof of service for each document so served. Please see #Rule 9.2 of the courts ECF Rules & Instructions for further information..(tro) |
| NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT - SUA SPONTE to Judge Laura Taylor Swain. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case. (vba) |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241. Document filed by Rodney Smith.(tro) |
| Case Designated ECF. (tro) |
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 New York Southern 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
| Search for this case: Smith v. Jamison | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: Warden J. Jamison | |
| 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 ] |
| Petitioner: Rodney Smith | |
| 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.
