MALDONADO v. BOHINKSI et al
| MIGUEL MALDONADO |
| THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, SUPERINTENDENT BOHINKSI and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA |
| 2:2024cv04451 |
| August 22, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| CRAIG M STRAW |
| JOSHUA D WOLSON |
| Habeas Corpus: (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 9, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER THAT THE PHILADELPHIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE MUST RESPOND TO THE MOTIONS WITHIN 21 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER. SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE CRAIG M. STRAW ON 10/9/24. 10/10/24 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO MALDONADO AND EMAILED.(rf, )
|
| Filing 9 MOTION TO INTRODUCE EVIDENCE filed by MIGUEL MALDONADO..(rf, ) |
| Filing 8 MOTION TO DISMISS filed by MIGUEL MALDONADO..(rf, ) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER THAT 1. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY SHALL FILE SPECIFIC AND DETAILED ANSWERS WITHIN SIXTY (60) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 5, 28 U.S.C. FOL. 2254. IF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY FINDS THAT ANY CLAIM IS UNTIMELY PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. 2244(D), HE OR SHE MAY FOREGO A DISCUSSION OF THE MERITS OF SUCH CLAIM AND FOCUS THE ARGUMENT REGARDING THAT CLAIM SOLELY ON TIMELINESS. AS REQUIRED BY 18 U.S.C. 771(B)(2), THE COMMONWEALTH IS FURTHER ORDERED TO ENSURE THAT IN A FEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS PROCEEDING ARISING OUT OF A STATE CONVICTION, ANY CRIME VICTIMS ARE AFFORDED THEIR RIGHTS UNDER THE CRIMES VICTIMS ACT, AS AMENDED JULY 27, 2006. 2. PETITIONER MAY, IF HE CHOOSES, FILE A REPLY TO THE RESPONDENTS ANSWER WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE DATE RESPONDENTS ANSWER IS FILED. 3. THE PROTHONOTARY, CLERK OF COURT, OR OFFICE OF JUDICIAL SUPPORT OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK OF THIS COURT COPIES OF ALL RECORDS, INCLUDING TRANSCRIPTS OF NOTES OF TESTIMONY AT ARRAIGNMENT, TRIAL, SENTENCING, SUPPRESSION HEARINGS, POST-CONVICTION HEARINGS, PETITIONS, PLEADINGS, OPINIONS AND BRIEFS OF STATECOURT PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF COMMONWEALTH V. MALDONADO, CP-51-CR-0008023-2015, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA WITHIN THIRTY (30)DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER. SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE CRAIG M. STRAW ON 9/3/24. 9/3/24 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE. CERT COPIES EMAILED TO DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR PHILADELPHIA COUNTY & COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY* (rf, )
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER THAT MOTION TO PROCEED IFP IS DENIED AS MOOT. FURTHER ORDERED THAT CASE IS REFERRED TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE STRAW FOR REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. CLERK OF COURT SHALL PROVIDE THE PHILADELPHIA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE AND THE PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL WITH A COPY OF THE PETITION. SIGNED BY DISTRICT JUDGE JOSHUA D. WOLSON ON 9/3/24. 9/3/24 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO MALDONADO. EMAILED TO PHILA DA'S OFFICE & OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR STATE OF PA*(rf, )
|
| DOC. NO. 5 MAILED TO PRO SE ON 8/28/2024. (md) |
| Filing 5 PRO SE NOTICE RE:GUIDELINES *NOT MAILED TO PRO SE*(rf, ) |
| Filing 4 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement by MIGUEL MALDONADO. (rf, ) |
| Filing 3 Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number 20022949 (rf, ) |
| Filing 2 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number 20022949.), filed by MIGUEL MALDONADO.(rf, ) |
| Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by MIGUEL MALDONADO..(rf, ) |
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.
