Panus v. Collier
| Justin Panus |
| Brian Collier and Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID |
| 1:2023cv00999 |
| August 21, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Texas |
| Susan Hightower |
| Robert Pitman |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 12, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Reset Answer Deadline: Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID answer due 11/13/2023. (cc3) |
Text Order GRANTING #9 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Respondent's answer is due on or before November 13, 2023. Entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (tmj)
|
| Filing 9 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order). Motions referred to Judge Susan Hightower. (Wawrzynski, Stephanie) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Stephanie N. Wawrzynski on behalf of Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID. Attorney Stephanie N. Wawrzynski added to party Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID(pty:res) (Wawrzynski, Stephanie) |
|
Text Order DENYING #7 Motion to Appoint Counsel. There is no constitutional right to have an attorney appointed when a prisoner collaterally attacks his conviction. Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551, 555 (1987). On the other hand, this Court is permitted to appoint counsel to a person seeking relief under 2254 where "the interests of justice so require and such person is financially unable to obtain representation." 18 U.S.C. 3006A(b); See also, Schwander v. Blackburn, 750 F.2d 494, 502 (5th Cir. 1985). Additionally, an indigent prisoner has a statutory right to appointed counsel in 2254 cases if an evidentiary hearing is required. Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2254 Proceedings. Until it is decided whether a hearing is required, a judge has discretion over whether to appoint counsel. At this time, the Court determines that an evidentiary hearing as provided by Rule 8 is not required. If, at a later date, the Court decides to hold an evidentiary hearing, the Court will appoint counsel to represent Petitioner. Entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (tmj)
|
| Filing 7 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Justin Panus. Motions referred to Judge Susan Hightower. (jv2) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER Directing Respondent to Answer Petition. Signed by Judge Robert Pitman. (cc3)
|
| Filing 5 Filing fee received in the amount of $5.00, receipt number 1194. (cc3) |
| Filing 4 Memorandum of Law in Support of #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Justin Panus. (cc3) (Main Document 4 replaced on 8/29/2023) (cc3). |
| Filing 3 Case Opening Letter to Justin Panus. (cr5) |
|
Filing 2
STANDING ORDER (dated 02/21/2020) REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Susan Hightower. Signed by Judge Robert Pitman. (cr5)
|
| Filing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ($ 5 FILING FEE DUE), filed by Justin Panus. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Cover Letter, #3 Affidavit, #4 Envelope)(cr5) |
| Case assigned to Judge Robert Pitman. CM WILL NOW REFLECT THE JUDGE INITIALS AS PART OF THE CASE NUMBER. PLEASE APPEND THESE JUDGE INITIALS TO THE CASE NUMBER ON EACH DOCUMENT THAT YOU FILE IN THIS CASE. (cr5) |
| If ordered by the court, all referrals and consents in this case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Hightower. (cr5) |
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 Western 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
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.
