Davis v. Director, TDCJ-CID
Petitioner: George Ray Davis
Respondent: Director, TDCJ-CID
Case Number: 4:2021cv00809
Filed: July 1, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Presiding Judge: Mark Pittman
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Pet/Habeas Corpus: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on July 2, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
July 2, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 5 FINAL JUDGMENT: In accordance with its order of dismissal #4 signed this day, the motion of George Ray Davis, opened as an action under 28 U.S.C. 2254, is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 7/2/2021) (sre)
July 2, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER OF DISMISSAL: Because no 28 U.S.C. 2254 petition has been received by or actually filed in this Court, the Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain Davis's motion. Thus, the motion is DISMISSED and the clerk of Court is directed to close the case. The clerk of Court is further directed to send to Davis a form 2254 petition and a form application to proceed in forma pauperis and certificate of inmate trust account in the event he wishes to file a future habeas petition in this Court and is unable to pay the $5.00 filing fee for habeas petitions. Davis may request tolling of the statute of limitations in his 2254 petition. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 7/2/2021) (sre)
July 2, 2021 ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:4,5. Also mailed Davis a form 2254 petition and a form application to proceed in forma pauperis and certificate of inmate trust account. Fri Jul 2 09:59:51 CDT 2021 (crt)
July 1, 2021 Filing 3 Notice and Instruction to Pro Se Party. (tln)
July 1, 2021 Filing 2 New Case Notes: A filing fee has not been paid. No prior sanctions found. (For court use only - links to the #national and #circuit indexes.) File to: staff attorney PW. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge. Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. Attorneys are further reminded that, if necessary, they must comply with Local Rule 83.10(a) within 14 days or risk the possible dismissal of this case without prejudice or without further notice. (tln)
July 1, 2021 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by George Ray Davis. 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. (tln)
July 1, 2021 ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:2,3. Thu Jul 1 15:47:42 CDT 2021 (crt)

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: Davis v. Director, TDCJ-CID
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Director, TDCJ-CID
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: George Ray Davis
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?