Castoreno v. Lumpkin
| Christopher Castoreno |
| Juan Garcia and Bobby Lumpkin |
| 5:2023cv00068 |
| January 17, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Texas |
| Jason K Pulliam |
| 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 March 17, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER DISMISSING #9 Motion to Vacate. It is further ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED for the instant motion, as reasonable jurists could not debate the denial of Petitioners motion on substantive or procedural grounds, nor find that the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed Signed by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. (nm)
|
| Filing 9 PRO-SE MOTION to Vacate Judgment under Rule 60(b)(4) #7 Judgment, by Christopher Castoreno. (wg) |
|
Text Order DISMISSING as MOOT #8 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis entered by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. Petitioner's $5 filing fee was timely submitted and docketed on February 22, 2023 (ECF No. 4). (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jg5)
|
| Filing 8 PRO-SE MOTION to Proceed in forma pauperis by Christopher Castoreno. (wg) |
|
Filing 7
JUDGMENT, Pursuant to this Courts Dismissal Order of even date herewith, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 (ECF No. 1) filed by Petitioner Christopher Castoreno is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. No Certificate of Appealability shall issue in this case. This case is now CLOSED. Signed by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. (wg)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER DISMISSING CASE, Petitioners 2254 application (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for want of jurisdiction; this Court DENIES Petitioner a certificate of appealability. See Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing 2254 Proceedings; and All remaining motions, if any, are DENIED, and this case is now CLOSED. Signed by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. (wg)
|
|
Text Order DISMISSING as MOOT #5 Motion for Extension entered by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. Petitioner's $5 filing fee was timely submitted and docketed on February 22, 2023 (ECF No. 4). (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jg5)
|
| Filing 5 PRO-SE MOTION for Extension of Time to Pay Filing Fee re #4 Filing Fee Received, #3 Order, by Christopher Castoreno. (wg) |
| Filing 4 Filing fee received in the amount of $5.00, receipt number 02194516 (wg) |
|
Filing 3
ORDERED, that within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, Petitioner shall either pay the $5.00 filing fee or submit a Motion to Proceed IFP, along with a current history of his inmate trust fund account. If Petitioner fails to comply with this Order, this action may be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with this Order. Signed by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. (wg)
|
| Filing 2 Case Opening Letter to Christopher Castoreno. (dtg) |
| Filing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Christopher Castoreno. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Copy of Envelope)(dtg) |
| If ordered by the court, all referrals will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Bemporad. (dtg) |
| THIS CASE HAS BEEN RANDOMLY ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JASON K. PULLIAM. (dtg) |
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.
