Woods v. Williams et al
| Carlin Woods |
| Michael Carvajal and Warden Mark Williams |
| 4:2020cv02547 |
| November 12, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio |
| Pamela A Barker |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 10, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Financial Transaction in the amount of $5.00 received from Carlin Wood. Receipt # 44660005635 (R,Li) |
| Filing 1 Emergency Petition under 28 USC 2241 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a person in federal custody. Filing fee not paid. Filed by Carlin Woods. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Declaration/Affidavit of Carlin Woods, #3 Exhibit A - Rejection Letter from Mark Williams, #4 Exhibit B - Letter to Mark Williams from CARES Act Home Confinement, #5 Exhibit C - Carlin Woods' Male Pattern Risk Assessment Scoring Sheet, #6 Exhibit D - Institutional Referral for Home Confinement, #7 Exhibit E - Unresponded to Trulincs Message to Carlin Woods' Unit Head, J.C. Hayes, #8 Exhibit F - Unresponded to Trulincs Message to Warden Mark Williams, #9 Transmittal Letter) (S,Ke) |
| Judge Pamela A. Barker assigned to case. (S,Ke) |
| Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 3.1. In the event of a referral, case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Henderson. (S,Ke) |
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
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.
