Hummel v. Stephens

Hummel v. Stephens

Defendant:	Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Petitioner:	John Hummel
Case Number:	4:2016cv00133
Filed:	February 4, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Office:	Fort Worth Office
County:	Anderson
Presiding Judge:	Reed C. O'Connor
Nature of Suit:	Death Penalty
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jury Demanded By:	None

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
January 3, 2018	Filing 40 Memorandum Opinion and Order. Because Petitioner is not entitled to relief on any of his AEDPA claims, the Court DENIES his Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 12). In accordance with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b) and 28 U.S .C. § 2253(c), and after considering the record in this case, the Court DENIES Petitioner a certificate of appealability because he has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); see Mill er-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 33638 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 48384 (2000). If Petitioner files a notice of appeal, he may proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(d)(7). It is ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 1/3/2018) (trt)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 3, 2018

Filing 40 Memorandum Opinion and Order. Because Petitioner is not entitled to relief on any of his AEDPA claims, the Court DENIES his Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 12). In accordance with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b) and 28 U.S .C. § 2253(c), and after considering the record in this case, the Court DENIES Petitioner a certificate of appealability because he has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); see Mill er-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 33638 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 48384 (2000). If Petitioner files a notice of appeal, he may proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(d)(7). It is ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 1/3/2018) (trt)

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 this case: Hummel v. Stephens
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: John Hummel
Represented By:	Kristin Renea Brown
Represented By:	Michael Mowla
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 ]
Defendant: Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Represented By:	Tomee Morgan Heining
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.

Why Is My Information Online?