Marsh v. Genovese, Warden
| Elvis Louis Marsh |
| Kevin Genovese, Warden |
| 1:2022cv00015 |
| May 20, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| William L Campbell |
| Barbara D Holmes |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 13, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
ENTRY OF JUDGMENT re: #7 Order Dismissing Case. Memorandum Opinion of the Court (xc:Pro se party by regular mail. ) (bs)
|
|
Filing 7
MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT: Petitioner has not demonstrated that he is entitled to equitable tolling. Accordingly, the petition is DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Because reasonable jurists could not disagree with the resolution of Petitioner's claims, the Court denies a Certificate of Appealability. This Order constitutes final judgment in this action. Signed by District Judge William L. Campbell, Jr on 7/13/2022. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail. ) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(bs)
|
|
Filing 6
RESPONSE TO MEMORANDUM AND ORDER filed by Elvis Louis Marsh re #5 Order to Show Cause (bs)
|
|
Filing 5
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: After conducting a preliminary review of Petitioner's Section 2254 petition under Rule 4, Rules Section 2254 Cases, it appears that the petition should be dismissed as untimely. However, Petitioner shall be given 30 days to SHOW CAUSE why his petition should not be dismissed for untimeliness. Petitioner is warned that the Court may dismiss the petition if Petitioner does not respond by the deadline. Petitioner may request an extension of time within which to respond if he does so in writing prior to the deadline. Signed by District Judge William L. Campbell, Jr on 6/3/2022. (xc: Pro se party by regular mail.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing 4
RECEIPT #34675066057 in the amount of $5.00 posted by Elvis Louis Marsh re #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (bs)
|
|
TN State Bar status verified as active for Michael Matthew Stahl admitted to this court. (bs)
|
|
Filing 3
NOTICE of Appearance by Michael Matthew Stahl on behalf of Kevin Genovese, Warden (Stahl, Michael)
|
|
Filing 2
NOTICE/INFORMATION regarding Consent of the Parties to the Magistrate Judge. (bs)
|
|
Filing 1
PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Elvis Louis Marsh.(bs)
|
|
Notice mailed to pro se party regarding filing of new case (docket sheet & certificate of service form included). (bs)
|
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 Tennessee Middle 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: Marsh v. Genovese, Warden | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Elvis Louis Marsh | |
| 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: Kevin Genovese, Warden | |
| Represented By: | Michael Matthew Stahl |
| 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.
