NERO v. TICE et al
JOSEPH NERO |
ERIC TICE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF SOMERSET COUNTY |
3:2021cv00183 |
October 18, 2021 |
US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
Lisa Pupo Lenihan |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 16, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Morgan C. Davis on behalf of ERIC TICE. (Davis, Morgan) |
Filing 7 PETITION FOR WRIT FOR HABEAS CORPUS/Return of Service Returned Executed THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA served on 12/8/2021, answer due 12/29/2021; THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF SOMERSET COUNTY served on 12/9/2021, answer due 12/30/2021; ERIC TICE served on 12/9/2021, answer due 12/30/2021. (jv) |
Filing 6 Remark: Service copies were forwarded to the U.S. Marshal. Text-only entry. No PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jmb) |
Filing 5 ORDER DIRECTING that the United States Marshal shall make service of this order, together with a copy of the (ECF. No. #3 ) Petition for Writ of Habeas upon the respondents, Warden Eric Tice, the District Attorney of Somerset County, the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as well as the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, Ted Johnson, Chairman, with costs to be advanced by the United States. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-one (21) days of service of this order, respondents shall respond to the allegations of the petition for writ of habeas corpus. The District Attorney shall address both the merits of the petition and exhaustion of state court remedies as required. The answer shall comply with the requirements of Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. The District Attorney shall furnish this court with the state court records, including all relevant transcripts, all briefs filed by petitioner, and all written opinions of the courts. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are allowed fourteen (14) days from this date to appeal this order to a district judge pursuant to Rule 72.C.2 of the Local Rules. Failure to appeal within fourteen (14) days will constitute waiver of the right to appeal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on 11/16/2021. (jmb) |
Filing 4 BRIEF in Support of #3 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by JOSEPH NERO. (jv) |
Filing 3 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee $5, receipt number 34668005769), filed by JOSEPH NERO. (Attachments: #1 Receipt) (jv) |
Filing 2 ORDER that the Clerk of Court is to mark this case closed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petitioner may reopen the case by paying the $5.00 filing fee or submitting a motion to proceed in forma pauperis and a certified copy of the account statement for the six (6) months preceding the filing of the complaint within 30 days from the date of this order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are allowed fourteen (14) days from this date to appeal this order to a District Judge pursuant to Rule 72.C.2 of the Local Rules. Failure to appeal within fourteen (14) days will constitute waiver of the right to appeal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on 10/27/2021. (jmb) |
Filing 1 Remark: Writ of Habeas Corpus lodged since no Payment or Motion to proceed IFP was received. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum of Law in support of Habeas Corpus Peition, #2 Envelope) (jv) |
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.