Smith v. State of Rhode Island
| Andrew J. Smith |
| State of Rhode Island |
| 1:2018cv00621 |
| November 13, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Rhode Island |
| Lincoln D Almond |
| William E Smith |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 23, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 MOTION for U.S. Court to Accept Filing Fee filed by Andrew J. Smith. Responses due by 1/9/2019. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(Urizandi, Nisshy) |
| Filing 8 Letter Re: Money Orders Received (Attachments: #1 Envelope and Letter, #2 Returned Money Order) (Simoncelli, Michael) |
| Filing 7 Filing fee: $ 5.00, receipt number 14670021650 (Simoncelli, Michael) |
| Filing 6 OBJECTION TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE DECISION to District Court re Order filed by Andrew J. Smith. Responses due by 12/26/2018. (Potter, Carrie) Modified on 12/12/2018 (Potter, Carrie). |
| Filing 5 OBJECTION to #4 Report and Recommendations filed by Andrew J. Smith. (Potter, Carrie) (Main Document 5 replaced on 12/12/2018) (Potter, Carrie). |
Filing 4
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that Petitioner's Motions to Proceed IFP (ECF Doc. Nos. 2 and 3) be DENIED and that Petitioner be ORDERED to pay the $5.00 filing fee forthwith. Also recommending that this case be dismissed without prejudice, absent such payment. #2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Andrew J. Smith, #3 Second MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Andrew J. Smith. Objections to R&R due by 12/14/2018. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond on 11/30/2018. (Noel, Jeannine)
|
| Filing 3 Second MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Andrew J. Smith. (Attachments: #1 Inmate Account Statement)(Potter, Carrie) |
|
TEXT ORDER re #2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Andrew J. Smith. Petitioner's IFP Application is incomplete since he has failed to provide a certified copy of his inmate account statement as required, and his claim that such requirement is unconstitutional is not legally supported. In this action, Petitioner describes himself as a "victim of illegal incarceration" and seeks to vacate an allegedly unconstitutional state criminal conviction and resulting prison sentence. Thus, this action is properly treated as one seeking habeas corpus relief under 28 USC section 2254 and the required filing fee to initiate such an action is $5.00. If he wishes to purse this action, Petitioner shall, within 30 days, either (1) pay the $5.00 filing fee; or (2) properly support his IFP Application by filing a certified copy of his inmate account statement as required. Failure by Petitioner to comply with this Order will result in dismissal of this action without prejudice. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond on 11/16/2018. (Noel, Jeannine)
|
| CASE PERMANENTLY ASSIGNED Since Chief Judge William E. Smith has determined that this case is in fact related to 18-cv-20-WES-LDA this case is permanently assigned to Chief Judge William E. Smith for all further proceedings (Urizandi, Nisshy) |
| MOTIONS REFERRED: #2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis referred for Report and Recommendation to Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond. (Urizandi, Nisshy) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Andrew J. Smith. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit)(Potter, Carrie) Modified on 11/13/2018 (Farrell Pletcher, Paula). |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Andrew J. Smith. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit)(Potter, Carrie) Modified on 11/13/2018 (Farrell Pletcher, Paula). |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT, filed by Andrew J. Smith. (Attachments: #1 Appendix, #2 Exhibit, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Potter, Carrie) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT, filed by Andrew J. Smith. (Attachments: #1 Appendix, #2 Exhibit, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Potter, Carrie) |
| CASE CONDITIONALLY ASSIGNED to Chief Judge William E. Smith and Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond. Related Case Number 18-cv-20-WES-LDA based upon the indication on the cover sheet that a related case previously was assigned to the presiding judge. The assignment is subject to the presiding judge's determination that the cases, in fact, are related. (Potter, Carrie) |
| CASE CONDITIONALLY ASSIGNED to Chief Judge William E. Smith and Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond. Related Case Number 18-cv-20-WES-LDA based upon the indication on the cover sheet that a related case previously was assigned to the presiding judge. The assignment is subject to the presiding judge's determination that the cases, in fact, are related. (Potter, Carrie) |
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 Rhode Island 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
| Search for this case: Smith v. State of Rhode Island | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: State of Rhode Island | |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: Andrew J. Smith | |
| 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.
