Smith v. Richarson
Charles R Smith |
Reed Richardson |
1:2019cv01701 |
November 19, 2019 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin |
William C Griesbach |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on January 13, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 14 FEE NOTICE AND ORDER of USCA re #10 Notice of Appeal Prisoner filed by Charles R Smith. (mac) |
Filing 13 USCA Case Number 20-1064 re: #10 Notice of Appeal Prisoner filed by Charles R Smith. (mac) |
Filing 12 Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals re #10 Notice of Appeal Prisoner (cav) |
Filing 11 Pro Se Cover Letter re: #10 Notice of Appeal Prisoner (cav) |
Copy of Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Docket Sheet to USCA #12 , Pro Se Cover Letter #11 sent via U.S. Mail to Charles Smith (cav) |
Filing 9 ORDER granting #8 Motion for Extension of Time. The Court Construes the Motion to be a Notice of Appeal. (cc: all counsel and via US Mail to Smith)(Griesbach, William) |
Filing 10 NOTICE OF APPEAL by Charles R Smith from USDC re: #6 Screening Order and #7 Judgment. Newlin Notice to be sent by 3/9/2020 (cc: all counsel). (cav) |
Filing 8 See Docket entries #9 and #10 Notice of Appeal - MOTION for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal and REQUEST for Certificate of Appealability by Charles R Smith. (mac) Modified on 1/10/2020 to note the document was construed as a notice of appeal (cav). |
Filing 7 JUDGMENT signed by Deputy Clerk approved by Judge William C Griesbach on 11/27/19. (cc: all counsel and via US Mail to Smith)(lh) |
Filing 6 SCREENING ORDER signed by Judge William C. Griesbach on 11/27/19. This petition is summarily DISMISSED pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing 2254 Cases. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment. Smith's #2 MOTION to appoint counsel is DENIED as moot. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. (cc: all counsel and via US Mail to Smith)(Griesbach, William) |
Filing 5 Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form filed by Charles R Smith. (NOTICE: Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 73 this document is not viewable by the judge.) (cmb) |
Filing 4 LETTER from the clerk to petitioner re Consent/Refusal to Magistrate Judge Duffin and requesting that the consent/refusal form be filed within 21 days. Mailed to petitioner. (cmb) |
Filing 3 AFFIDAVIT of Charles R. Smith. (Attachments: #1 Exhibits)(cmb) |
Filing 2 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Charles R Smith. (cmb) |
Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Charles R Smith. (Filing Fee PAID $5 MK4689080396) (Attachments: #1 Exhibits)(cmb) |
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 Wisconsin Eastern 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
Search for this case: Smith v. Richarson | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: Charles R Smith | |
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 ] |
Respondent: Reed Richardson | |
Represented By: | Wisconsin Dept of Justice - Habeas |
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.