BAILEY v. STEWART et al

BAILEY v. STEWART et al

Petitioner:	STEVEN MYKEL BAILEY
Respondent:	THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLANIA and ROBERT B. STEWART
Case Number:	2:2011cv01020
Filed:	August 9, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Pittsburgh Office
County:	Schuylkill
Presiding Judge:	Lisa Pupo Lenihan
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
March 7, 2014	Filing 24 ORDER denying 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by STEVEN MYKEL BAILEY, 22 Supplement filed by STEVEN MYKEL BAILEY. Denying certificate of appealability. The Clerk of Court shall mark this case CLOSED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on March 7, 2014. (kcc)
January 31, 2013	Filing 12 ORDER re 11 Supplemental Answer to Writ. Within fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order, Petitioner shall either inform the Court as to whether he wishes to continue with this habeas proceeding or file a motion to stay this habeas proceedin g until such time his second PCRA proceedings have concluded. Failure to respond in a timely manner will result in the continuation of these habeas proceedings as normal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on January 31, 2013. (kcc, ) Modified on 1/31/2013. (jsp)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 7, 2014

Filing 24 ORDER denying 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by STEVEN MYKEL BAILEY, 22 Supplement filed by STEVEN MYKEL BAILEY. Denying certificate of appealability. The Clerk of Court shall mark this case CLOSED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on March 7, 2014. (kcc)

January 31, 2013

Filing 12 ORDER re 11 Supplemental Answer to Writ. Within fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order, Petitioner shall either inform the Court as to whether he wishes to continue with this habeas proceeding or file a motion to stay this habeas proceedin g until such time his second PCRA proceedings have concluded. Failure to respond in a timely manner will result in the continuation of these habeas proceedings as normal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on January 31, 2013. (kcc, ) Modified on 1/31/2013. (jsp)

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 this case: BAILEY v. STEWART et al
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLANIA
Represented By:	Leanne K. Shipley
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: ROBERT B. STEWART
Represented By:	Leanne K. Shipley
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 ]
Petitioner: STEVEN MYKEL BAILEY
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?