MOHR v. PENCHISHEN et al
Petitioner: PATRICK MOHR
Respondent: DAVID PENCHISHEN, NORTHAMPTON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, MICHAEL ACEVEDO and DARWIN WAGNER
Case Number: 5:2022cv03458
Filed: August 26, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Presiding Judge: JOHN M YOUNGE
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus: (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 12, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 18, 2022 Filing 10 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THAT THIS PETITION BE DISMISSED. THERE HAS BEEN NO SUBSTANTIAL SHOWING OF THE DENIAL OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT REQUIRING THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY. SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE SCOTT W. REID ON 10/18/22. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order, #2 R&R NOTICE) 10/18/22 ENTERED AND COPIES NOT MAILED TO PRO SE; E-MAILED.(amas)
October 18, 2022 COPY OF DOC. NO. 10 HAS BEEN MAILED TO PRO SE. (bw)
October 11, 2022 Filing 9 Response in Opposition by NORTHAMPTON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. (KULIK, REBECCA)
October 4, 2022 Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by REBECCA J. KULIK on behalf of NORTHAMPTON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE with Certificate of Service(KULIK, REBECCA)
October 3, 2022 Filing 7 Receipt of State Court Record on 10/3/22, sent from CLERK'S OFFICE to CHAMBERS OF JUDGE REID. (amas)
September 28, 2022 State Court Record received and forwarded to the Chambers of Judge Reid. (ke)
September 9, 2022 MAILED OUT ORDER ENTRY #6 TO PETITIONER ON 9/9/22. (jaa, )
September 8, 2022 A COPY OF THE PETITION (DOC. NO. #1 ) AND ORDER TO RESPOND (DOC. NO. #6 ) E-MAILED TO THE NORTHAMPTON CO DA AND THE PA ATTY GENERAL ON 9/8/22. ORDER TO RESPOND (DOC. NO. #6 ) FAXED TO THE NORTHAMPTON CO CCP ON 9/8/22. (amas)
September 8, 2022 Document 5 mailed to Pro Se. (er)
September 7, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER THAT THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SHALL ENTER ITS APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS UPON RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER. THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SHALL FILE A SPECIFIC AND DETAILED ANSWER TO THE CLAIMS IN PETITIONER'S HABEAS PETITION AND SUPPORTING LEGAL MEMORANDUM WITHIN 45 DAYS OF THIS ORDER. THE CLERK FOR THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF NORTHAMPTON 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 STATE COURT PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF MOHR v. PENCHISHEN et al, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF NORTHAMPTON COUNTY,22-cv-03458 WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER. PRISONER STATE RECORD DUE BY 10/7/2022. SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE SCOTT W. REID ON 9/7/22. 9/8/22 ENTERED AND COPIES NOT MAILED TO PRO SE. (amas)
September 7, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER THAT LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS IS GRANTED. THE ABOVE CAPTIONED CASE IS REFERRED TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE SCOTT W. REID FOR A RPEORT AND RECOMMENDATION. THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECED TO PROVIDE THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL WITH A COPY OF THE PETITION. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOHN M. YOUNGE ON 9/7/22.9/7/22 ENTERED AND COPIES NOT MAILED TO PRO SE. (amas)
September 7, 2022 A COPY OF THE PETITION (DOC. NO. #1 ) AND THE SERVICE ORDER (DOC. NO. #5 ) E-MAILED TO THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY DA'S OFFICE AND THE PA ATTY GENERAL ON 9/7/22. (amas)
September 1, 2022 Doc. 2 mailed to Pro Se. (er)
August 30, 2022 Filing 4 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement by PATRICK MOHR. (amas)
August 30, 2022 Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by PATRICK MOHR.(amas)
August 26, 2022 Filing 2 PRO SE NOTICE RE:GUIDELINES. (dt)
August 26, 2022 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), filed by PATRICK MOHR. (NO FILING FEE OR IFP), (ENVELOPE ATTACHED)(dt) Modified on 8/31/2022 (dt).

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 this case: MOHR v. PENCHISHEN et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: PATRICK MOHR
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: DAVID PENCHISHEN
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: NORTHAMPTON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Represented By: REBECCA J. KULIK
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: MICHAEL ACEVEDO
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: DARWIN WAGNER
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.


Why Is My Information Online?