GREEN v. P/O SEDLER #7592 et al
| TERRANCE GREEN |
| P/O SEDLER #7592, JUDGE MOSS, LARRY KRASNER, JOSH SHAPIRO, JASON WERGES #3695 and JACQUELINE C. ROMERO |
| 2:2023cv02632 |
| July 7, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| PAUL S DIAMOND |
| Habeas Corpus: (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 24, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| DOC 5 MAILED TO GREEN (rf, ) |
Filing 5
ORDER DENYING #4 MOTION CHALLENGING ORDER. SIGNED BY HONORABLE PAUL S. DIAMOND ON 8/23/23. 8/23/23 ENTERED. PRO SE PETITIONER NOT MAILED. (va)
|
| Filing 4 MOTION Challenging the Order, filed by TERRANCE GREEN. Envelope. (va) |
| COPY OF DOC. NO. 3 HAS BEEN MAILED TO PRO SE. (bw) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER THAT THE PETITION IS DENIED AND DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 2. THERE IS NO CAUSE TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY. 3. THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO CLOSE THIS MATTER. SIGNED BY HONORABLE PAUL S. DIAMOND ON 7/24/23. 7/24/23 ENTERED AND COPIES NOT MAILED TO PETITIONER.(jaa, )
|
| Pro Se Guidelines Notice (#2) mailed to Green. (fdc) |
| Filing 2 PRO SE NOTICE RE: GUIDELINES. PRO SE PETITIONER NOT MAILED. (va) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by TERRANCE GREEN. Envelope. FEE NOT PAID. NO IFP. (va) |
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 Pennsylvania Eastern 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.
