Steele v. Hudgins
| Charles V. Steele |
| Richard Hudgins |
| 5:2020cv00103 |
| June 2, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia |
| John Preston Bailey |
| James P Mazzone |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 30, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 CLERK'S JUDGMENT in favor of Richard Hudgins against Charles V. Steele. Signed by Clerk of Court on 7/30/2020. (copy to pro se Petitioner via CM/rrr)(ag) (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/30/2020: #1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (ag). |
Filing 8
ORDER ADOPTING #6 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The 2241 petition is DENIED and DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. The Motion to Appoint Counsel #5 is DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment in favor of the respondent and to STRIKE this case from the active docket of this Court. Signed by District Judge John Preston Bailey on 7/30/2020. (copy to pro se Petitioner via CM/rrr)(ag) (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/30/2020: #1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (ag).
|
| Filing 7 OBJECTION TO #6 THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. (Attachments: #1 Cover letter, #2 Envelope)(nmm) |
| Filing 6 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: it is RECOMMENDED that the #1 petition be DENIED and DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION, and the petitioners #5 Motion to Appoint Counsel be DENIED AS MOOT. Written objections shall be filed within fourteen days from the date of service of this report and recommendation. Failure to file written objections as set forth above shall constitute a waiver of de novo review by the District Court and a waiver of appellate review by the Circuit Court of Appeals. Signed by Magistrate Judge James P. Mazzone on 6/26/2020. (copy to pro se petitioner via cm,rrr) (nmm) (Additional attachment(s) added on 6/30/2020: #1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (nmm). |
| Filing 5 Letter MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Charles V. Steele. (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules sent via us mail) (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(nmm) |
| Filing 4 RETURN RECEIPT as to #3 NOTICE OF GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR APPEARING PRO SE IN FEDERAL COURT. SERVICE ACCEPTED on 6/4/2020. (nmm) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR APPEARING PRO SE IN FEDERAL COURT. (copy to pro se Petitioner via CM/rrr) (ag) (Additional attachment(s) added on 6/2/2020: #1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (ag). |
| Filing 2 Filing fee: $ 5.00, receipt number WVNC002943. (ag) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus against Richard Hudgins filed by Charles V. Steele. (Attachments: #1 Cover Letter, #2 Envelope)(copy of docket sheet sent to pro se Petitioner as requested)(ag) |
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.
- 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: Steele v. Hudgins | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: Richard Hudgins | |
| 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: Charles V. Steele | |
| 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.
