Horsey v. Ranks
James Wells Horsey |
William Ranks |
5:2022cv01021 |
December 1, 2022 |
US District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma |
Bernard M Jones |
Suzanne Mitchell |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 7, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 11 ORDER granting #10 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Response due by 2/14/2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell on 1/13/23. (lb) |
Filing 10 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,,, by William Ranks. Motions referred to Suzanne Mitchell. (Hunt, Caroline) |
Filing 9 ENTRY of Appearance by Caroline EJ Hunt on behalf of William Ranks (Hunt, Caroline) |
Filing 8 LETTER from James W Horsey (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (rr) |
Filing 7 ORDER.See Order for further details. The Clerk of Court is directed to send a copy of both the petition and this Order to the Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma on Respondents' behalf. Signed by Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell on 12/16/2022. (cps) |
Filing 6 Receipt for Money Received from James Wells Horsey in the amount of $5, receipt number 1 regarding #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, (dtb) |
Filing 5 ORDER to Cure Deficiency by 12/28/22. Signed by Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell on 12/7/22. (lb) |
Filing 3 ENTER ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell. Signed at the direction of Judge Bernard M. Jones on 12/5/2022. (dtb) |
Filing 2 NO PREVIOUS Cases (dtb) |
Filing 4 BRIEF IN SUPPORT re #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, by James Wells Horsey. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(dtb) |
Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by James Wells Horsey. (Attachments: #1 Attachment 1- Order Affirming Denial of Application For Post Conviction Relief, #2 Attachment 2- Summary Opinion, #3 Attachment 3- Order Denying Petitioner's Application for Post Conviction Relief, #4 Attachment 4- Order Denying Motion for Judicial Review, #5 Attachment 5- Order Denying Motion for Judicial Review, #6 Attachment 6- Certificate of Release, #7 Attachment 7- Judgement and Sentence, #8 Attachment 8- Nunc Pro Tunc Judgement and Sentence, #9 Attachment 9- Memo, #10 Attachment 10- Information, #11 Attachment 11- Amended Information, #12 Attachment 12- Transcript, #13 Attachment 13- Jury Trial Closing Instructions, #14 Attachment 14- Memo form the City of Lawton, #15 Attachment 15- Motion to Surppress Evidence, Dismiss Charges and Brief in Support, #16 Envelope)(dtb) |
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 Oklahoma Western 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: Horsey v. Ranks | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: James Wells Horsey | |
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 ] |
Respondent: William Ranks | |
Represented By: | Caroline EJ Hunt |
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.