Smocks v. United States of America
Troy Anthony Smocks |
United States of America |
3:2022cv02662 |
November 29, 2022 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
Rebecca Rutherford |
Karen Gren Scholer |
Prisoner Pet/Habeas Corpus: General |
28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 11, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
|
Filing 4 OBJECTION filed by Troy Anthony Smocks re: #3 Judge Scholer. (Lieberman, Mark) Modified text on 12/1/2022 (sxf). |
Filing 3 New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. CASREF case referral set and case referred to Magistrate Judge Rutherford (see Special Order 3). Case received over counter or electronically. 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 Rutherford). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. Motion(s) referred to Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford. (oyh) |
Filing 2 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Troy Anthony Smocks. In each Notice of Electronic Filing, the judge assignment is indicated, and a link to the # Judges Copy Requirements is provided. The court reminds the filer that any required copy of this and future documents must be delivered to the judge, in the manner prescribed, within three business days of filing. (Filing fee 5.00, Receipt ATXNDC-13331989) Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms, instructions, and exemption information may be found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: # Attorney Information - Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Attachments: #1 Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit(s) 1, #3 Exhibit(s) 2, #4 Exhibit(s) 3, #5 Exhibit(s) 4, #6 Exhibit(s) 5, #7 Exhibit(s) 6, #8 Exhibit(s) 7, #9 Exhibit(s) 8, #10 Exhibit(s) 9, #11 Exhibit(s) 10, #12 Exhibit(s) 11, #13 Exhibit(s) 12) (Lieberman, Mark) Modified to add filing fee on 11/30/2022 (cea). |
Filing 1 Emergency MOTION to Stay Supervised Release filed by Troy Anthony Smocks (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)Attorney Mark Joel Lieberman, I added to party Troy Anthony Smocks(pty:pet) (Lieberman, Mark) |
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: Smocks v. United States of America | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: Troy Anthony Smocks | |
Represented By: | Mark Joel Lieberman, I |
Represented By: | Mark Joel Lieberman |
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: United States of America | |
Represented By: | Ann Cruce-Haag-DOJ |
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.