Davis v. Sloan
Dwayne Davis |
Warden Brigham Sloan |
1:2019cv01456 |
June 24, 2019 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio |
James R Knepp |
Benita Y Pearson |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. § 2254 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on August 28, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 6 Attorney Appearance by Maura O'Neill Jaite filed by on behalf of Brigham Sloan. (Jaite, Maura) |
Filing 5 Magistrate Judge's Initial Order. Respondent shall file an answer to the petition within forty-five (45) days from the date of this order. The answer shall comply with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing 2254 Cases, and shall address all legal issues raised in the petition. Petitioner shall have thirty (30) days from the filing of Respondent's answer to respond by filing a reply. Respondent is granted leave of fifteen (15) days from the filing of Petitioner's reply to respond thereto by filing a sur-reply. Magistrate Judge James R. Knepp II on 7/16/2019. (S,JM) |
|
Copies of #4 and #5 mailed to Dwayne Davis, #A644-653, P.O. Box 8000, Conneaut, OH 44030, and Warden Brigham Sloan at 501 Thompson Road Conneaut, OH 44030 (including #1 ), with email copies to Scott Criss and Brian Higgins, Ohio Attorney General's Office on 7/16/2019. (S,JM) |
Copy of NEF for 7/10/2019 Order of Automatic Reference [non-document] mailed to Petitioner Dwayne Davis #A644-653, P.O. Box 8000, Conneaut, OH 44030 on 7/10/2019. (JLG) |
Automatic Reference [non-document] of Administrative Action to Magistrate Judge James R. Knepp, II pursuant to Local Rule 72.2. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 7/10/2019. (JLG) |
Filing 3 Administrative Track DCM Initial Order. Chief Judge Patricia A. Gaughan. (Y,A) |
Filing 2 Motion to proceed in forma pauperis filed by Petitioner Dwayne Davis. (Attachments: #1 Cashier's Statement, #2 Inmate Statement)(Y,A) |
Filing 1 Petition under 28 USC 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a person in state custody. Filing fee not paid, IFP. Filed by Dwayne Davis. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Exhibit 1-6, #4 Exhibit C1- Cleveland Police Report, #5 Exhibit Complaint, #6 Exhibit Commitment Paper, #7 Exhibit Municipal Court Examing Court Charge, #8 Exhibit AB- Melva Hills Affidavit, #9 Exhibit Pro Se Motion to Dismiss, #10 Exhibit Pro Se Motion, #11 Exhibit Affidavit of Veriity, #12 Exhibit Affidavit of Verity, #13 Exhibit Cleveland Muni Journal Entry, #14 Summons) (Y,A) |
Judge Benita Y. Pearson assigned to case, (Y,A) |
Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 3.1. In the event of a referral, case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge James R. Knepp, II. (Y,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.
Access this case on the Ohio Northern 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: Davis v. Sloan | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Respondent: Warden Brigham Sloan | |
Represented By: | Maura O'Neill Jaite |
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: Dwayne Davis | |
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.