Johnson v. The Court of Criminal Appeals
Jerome Johnson |
The Court of Criminal Appeals |
3:2018cv02762 |
October 15, 2018 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
A Joe Fish |
Renee Harris Toliver |
Prisoner Pet/Other: Mandamus & Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on January 7, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:5. Mon Dec 10 11:13:14 CST 2018 (crt) |
Filing 5 Findings and Recommendations on Case re: #3 Petition for Writ of Mandamus. This civil action should be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to comply with a court order and for lack of prosecution. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b) (an involuntary dismissal "operates as an adjudication on the merits," unless otherwise specified). (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 12/8/2018) (axm) |
Filing 4 ELECTRONIC ORDER AND NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY. Petitioner Jerome Johnson must address the following deficiency: Petitioner did not pay the required filing fee or submit a request to proceed in forma pauperis. Therefore, Petitioner is ORDERED to pay the $5.00 filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis with the required certificate of inmate trust account, by 11/16/2018. PETITIONER'S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER MAY RESULT IN THE DISMISSAL OF THIS ACTION PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(b). Petitioner is advised that the filing fee provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1915(b) do not apply to a petition for writ of mandamus stemming from state criminal proceedings, such as the one at issue in this case. See In re Stone, 118 F.3d 1032, 1034 (5th Cir. 1997). The Clerk of the Court is directed to provide to Petitioner, with service of this Order, a prisoner form application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 10/18/2018) (chmb) |
***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:1,2. Wed Oct 17 16:40:32 CDT 2018 (crt) |
Filing 3 Petition For Writ of Mandamus filed by Jerome Johnson. (ndt) |
Filing 2 Notice and Instruction to Pro Se Party. (ndt) |
Filing 1 New Case Notes: A filing fee has not been paid. CASREF case referral set and case referred to Magistrate Judge Toliver (see Special Order 3). Initiating documents received by mail. No prior sanctions found. (For court use only - links to the #national and #circuit indexes.) Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge (Judge Toliver). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (ndt) |
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 Texas Northern 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: Johnson v. The Court of Criminal Appeals | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Respondent: The Court of Criminal Appeals | |
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 ] |
Petitioner: Jerome Johnson | |
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.