JOINER v. SAPPER
Petitioner: RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
Respondent: J. SAPPER
Case Number: 1:2020cv00749
Filed: August 17, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Presiding Judge: L PATRICK AULD
Referring Judge: N C TILLEY
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28:2254
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 30, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 30, 2020 Assembled Electronic Record Transmitted to Fourth Circuit to US Court of Appeals re #8 Notice of Appeal Without Fee Payment. USCA 20-7449. (Hicks, Samantha)
September 30, 2020 Filing 10 NOTICE of Docketing from USCA re #8 Notice of Appeal Without Fee Payment filed by RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER. USCA Case Number 20-7449. Case manager T. Fischer. (Hicks, Samantha)
September 29, 2020 Filing 9 Electronic Transmission of Notice of Appeal to US Court of Appeals re #8 Notice of Appeal Without Fee Payment. (Hicks, Samantha)
September 28, 2020 Filing 8 NOTICE OF APPEAL Without Fee Payment as to #7 Judgment, #6 Order on Report and Recommendations, by RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER. (Attachments: #1 Envelope - Front and Back) (Hicks, Samantha)
September 17, 2020 Filing 7 JUDGMENT signed by JUDGE N. C. TILLEY, JR on 9/17/2020; that the Petition [Doc. #2 ] is dismissed, and that this action is dismissed. Finding neither a substantial issue for appeal concerning the denial of a constitutional right affecting the conviction nor a debatable procedural ruling, a certificate of appealability is denied. (Hicks, Samantha)
September 17, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER signed by JUDGE N. C. TILLEY, JR on 9/17/2020 adopting the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation; that the Petition [Doc. #2 ] is dismissed. A Judgment dismissing this action will be entered contemporaneously with this Order. Finding neither a substantial issue for appeal concerning the denial of a constitutional right affecting the conviction nor a debatable procedural ruling, a certificate of appealability is denied. (Hicks, Samantha)
September 17, 2020 CASE REFERRED regarding #3 RECOMMENDED RULING - MAGISTRATE JUDGE to JUDGE N. C. TILLEY, JR. (Winchester, Robin)
September 14, 2020 Filing 5 OBJECTION TO RECOMMENDED RULING - MAGISTRATE JUDGE re #3 Recommended Ruling - Magistrate Judge by Petitioner RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER. Response to Objections to R&R due by 9/28/2020. (Attachments: #1 Envelope - Front and Back) (Hicks, Samantha)
August 31, 2020 Filing 4 Notice of Mailing Recommendation: Objections to R&R due by 9/14/2020. Objections to R&R for Pro Se due by 9/17/2020. (Garland, Leah)
August 31, 2020 Opinion or Order ORDER granting #1 Motion for Application to Proceed IFP. Signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 8/31/2020. (Garland, Leah)
August 31, 2020 Filing 3 RECOMMENDATION AND ORDER OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 8/31/2020, that the Petition be dismissed for failure to apply to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit for an order authorizing this district court to consider the current Petition as is required by 28 U.S.C. 2244. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that in forma pauperis status is granted for the sole purpose of entering this Recommendation and Order. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall send Petitioner a copy of this Recommendation and Order, instruction forms for filing 2254 petitions in this Court and for filing a Motion for Authorization in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, an application to proceed in forma pauperis (upon request), and four copies of 2254 petition forms (more copies will be sent on request). Petitioner should keep the original and two copies of the 2254 petition which can be submitted in this Court if Petitioner obtains approval from the Fourth Circuit. There being no substantial issue for appeal concerning the denial of a constitutional right affecting the conviction nor a debatable procedural ruling, a certificate of appealability should not issue. (Garland, Leah)
August 18, 2020 CASE REFERRED for Screening (Taylor, Abby)
August 18, 2020 Filing 2 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit, #2 Additional attachments, #3 Additional attachments, #4 Additional attachments, #5 Additional attachments, #6 Additional attachments, #7 Additional attachments, #8 Additional attachments, #9 Additional attachments, #10 Additional attachments, #11 Additional attachments, #12 Additional attachments)(Taylor, Abby) (Main Document 2 and Attachments replaced on 10/15/2020 with corrected images) (Sheets, Jamie)
August 17, 2020 Filing 1 APPLICATION to Proceed IFP by RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER. (Attachments: #1 Envelope - Front and Back)(Taylor, Abby)

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 North Carolina Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: JOINER v. SAPPER
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: J. SAPPER
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: RAYMOND DAKIM HARRIS JOINER
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?