Garner v. US Supreme Court
| Daniel Gene Garner |
| US Supreme Court and Asa B. Buck, III |
| 5:2021hc02223 |
| October 14, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina |
| Louise Wood Flanagan |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 5, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Daniel Gene Garner. (Castania, M) |
| Filing 4 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (on form), filed by Daniel Gene Garner. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (Castania, M) |
| Case Submitted to District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan for initial review. As soon as review is completed by the court, an order will enter and the next appropriate step will be taken. (Docket sheet mailed to petitioner.) (Castania, M) |
Filing 3
ORDER directing petitioner to correct deficiencies. Response to order due by 11/9/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr. on 10/19/2021. Copy served via US Mail, along with forms: Daniel Gene Garner 31863, Carteret County Detention Center, P.O. Box 239, Beaufort, NC 28516. (Castania, M)
|
| Filing 2 Letter to petitioner regarding filing of petition. (Castania, M) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Motion for General Statute Amendment Change") filed by Daniel Gene Garner. (Attachments: #1 Cover Letter, #2 Envelope) (Indig, A.) |
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.
- 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.
