Dunlap v. Warden, Belmont Correctional Institution
| Kyle J Dunlap |
| Warden David W. Gray and Warden, Belmont Correctional Institution |
| 2:2021cv05849 |
| December 20, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Elizabeth Preston Deavers |
| Algenon L Marbley |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 9, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 RETURN of Writ re #4 State Court Record by Respondent Warden, Belmont Correctional Institution. (Rosenberg, Hilda) |
| Filing 4 State Court Record Exhibits 1-23 Bookmarked. (Attachments: #1 Transcript of Motion Hearing, #2 Transcript of Change of Plea and Sentencing) (Rosenberg, Hilda) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Hilda Rosenberg for Respondent Warden, Belmont Correctional Institution (Rosenberg, Hilda) |
Filing 2
ORDER - Re #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Kyle J Dunlap. It is ORDERED that Respondent shall file an answer conforming to the requirements of Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases within 60 DAYS. Answer Set for: David W. Gray answer due 2/19/2022. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on December 21, 2021. (jlk)
|
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number AOHSDC-8644980.), filed by Kyle J Dunlap. (Yeazel, Keith) |
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 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
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.
