Abdur'Rahman v. Bell

Abdur'Rahman v. Bell

Case Number:	3:1996cv00380
Filed:	April 23, 1996
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Office:	Death Penalty - Habeas Corpus Office
Presiding Judge:	Todd J. Campbell
Nature of Suit:	None
Cause of Action:	Federal Question
Jury Demanded By:	28:2254 Petition for Writ of H/C-Death Penalty

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
July 25, 2013	Filing 369 MEMORANDUM OF THE COURT AND ORDER: Pending before the Court are Petitioner's Motion For Relief From Judgment (Docket No. 351 ); Supplemental Authority In Support Of Motion For Relief From Judgment (Docket No. 353); Second Supplemental Authori ty In Support Of Motion For Relief From Judgment (Docket No. 354); Third Supplemental Authority In Support Of Motion For Relief From Judgment (Docket Nos. 357, 359); Reply To Response To Supplemental Authorities In Support Of Motion For Relief Fro m Judgment (Docket No. 366); and Statement Regarding Claims (Docket No. 367); as well as the Respondent's Responses thereto (Docket Nos. 352, 364). For the reasons set forth herein, the Court concludes that Petitioner's request to recons ider his claims, under Rule 60 or otherwise, should be denied because the Martinez/Trevino decisions do not apply to reverse the findings of procedural default. Signed by District Judge Todd J. Campbell on 7/25/2013. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(eh)
January 26, 2009	Filing 335 ORDER: For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, the Court concludes that the Petitioner's pending claims are without merit, and are dismissed. This Order shall constitute the judgment in this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Signed by Chief Judge Todd J. Campbell on 1/26/09. (km)

Date Filed

Document Text

July 25, 2013

Filing 369 MEMORANDUM OF THE COURT AND ORDER: Pending before the Court are Petitioner's Motion For Relief From Judgment (Docket No. 351 ); Supplemental Authority In Support Of Motion For Relief From Judgment (Docket No. 353); Second Supplemental Authori ty In Support Of Motion For Relief From Judgment (Docket No. 354); Third Supplemental Authority In Support Of Motion For Relief From Judgment (Docket Nos. 357, 359); Reply To Response To Supplemental Authorities In Support Of Motion For Relief Fro m Judgment (Docket No. 366); and Statement Regarding Claims (Docket No. 367); as well as the Respondent's Responses thereto (Docket Nos. 352, 364). For the reasons set forth herein, the Court concludes that Petitioner's request to recons ider his claims, under Rule 60 or otherwise, should be denied because the Martinez/Trevino decisions do not apply to reverse the findings of procedural default. Signed by District Judge Todd J. Campbell on 7/25/2013. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(eh)

January 26, 2009

Filing 335 ORDER: For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, the Court concludes that the Petitioner's pending claims are without merit, and are dismissed. This Order shall constitute the judgment in this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Signed by Chief Judge Todd J. Campbell on 1/26/09. (km)

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: Abdur'Rahman v. Bell
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?