Carter, et al v. Rone, et al
Case Number: 3:1990cv00780
Filed: August 5, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Office: Nashville Office
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
RSS 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 19, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 129 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF THE COURT. The petitioner's application for leave to proceed as a pauper on appeal 126 is DENIED. For the petitioner's use in completing any application under Rule 24(a)(5), which "must include a cop y of the affidavit filed in the district court and the district court's statement of reasons for its action," the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to include a copy of 126 with its mailing of the petitioner's service copy of this order. The Clerk is further DIRECTED to forward a copy of this Order to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, and to terminate 127 as a motion pending in this court. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 3/19/2021. (xc: Copy of this Order and 126 to Pro se party by regular mail. Copy of this Order to Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(kc) Modified on 3/19/2021 (kc).
February 8, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 123 MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT: Pending in this habeas corpus action is petitioner John E. Carters motion for a new trial, to alter or amend judgment or make additional findings, and for relief from judgment. (Doc. No. 119.) The petition seeks su ch relief in response to this courts August 5, 2020 order (Doc. No. 118) denying his most recent motion under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Also pending are two motions related to the petitioner's failure to receive the state's response to his prior Rule 60(b) motion. (Doc. Nos. 120, 121.) The petitioner has not demonstrated that he is entitled to relief from the court's November 5, 2020 order. His motion for such relief (Doc. No. 119) is therefore DENI ED. Having previously found that any appeal from the denial of Rule 60(b) relief would not be taken in good faith, and that the petitioner would therefore not be authorized by this court to pursue an appeal in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 118 at 9), th e court DECLINES to issue a COA. Finally, the petitioner's motions for an order directing the state to verify that he never received the response to his Rule 60(b) motion (Doc. No. 120) and to provide him with a service copy of that response ( Doc. No. 121) are DENIED as moot. Nevertheless, the Clerk SHALL include a copy of the state's response (Doc. No. 117) with the mailing of the petitioner's service copy of this order. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 2/8/2021. (xc: Pro se party by regular mail.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(kc)
August 5, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 118 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The petitioner's Rule 60(b)(6) motion (Doc. No. 113 ) is DENIED. In light of this denial, the petitioner's motions to proceed as a pauper (Doc. No. 112 ) and to reappoint counsel (Doc. No. 115 ) are DENIED as mo ot. Because an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, the petitioner is NOT certified to pursue an appeal in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 8/5/2020. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail. ) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(vh)
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 this case: Carter, et al v. Rone, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?