JOHNSON v. ADAMS
JERMALL E. JOHNSON |
MELINDA ADAMS, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF PENNSLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF ERIE COUNTY |
1:2022cv00237 |
July 27, 2022 |
US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
Richard A Lanzillo |
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 August 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 5 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee $5, receipt number 1000000004), filed by JERMALL E. JOHNSON. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit D, #2 Exhibit E, #3 Exhibit I) (jd) |
Filing 4 Habeas Filing fee: $5.00, receipt number 100000004 (jd) Modified on 9/1/2022 (keh). |
![]() |
Filing 2 Errata re #1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, by JERMALL E. JOHNSON. Reason for Correction: Wrong File Date on Petition. (Attachments: #1 Attached Envelope, #2 Habeas Petition lodged pending disposition of IFP Motion, #3 Exhibit I, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Inmate Account, #7 Envelope) (ijh) |
Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by JERMALL E. JOHNSON. (Attachments: #1 Attached envelope, #2 Habeas Petition lodged pending disposition of IFP Motion, #3 Exhibit I, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Inmate Account Statement, #7 Envelope) (ijh) Re-filed as an errata at #2 due to wrong filed stamp date on petition. Modified on 7/27/2022 (ijh). |
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 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
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.