Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

14-411 - Williams v. Wallace

Download Files


Document in Context
14-411 - Williams v. Wallace
May 26, 2016
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM: For the reasons discussed above, the Court concludes that petitioner has failed to establish that he is entitled to relief based on state court proceedings that were contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, or based upon an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceedings. 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254(d). Petitioner has also failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Therefore, the Court will not issue a certificate of appealability. See Cox v. Norris, 133 F.3d 565, 569 (8th Cir. 1997). A judgment in accordance with this Memorandum will be entered. Signed by District Judge Carol E. Jackson on 5/26/2016. (KMS)
March 20, 2018
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioners motion for an evidentiary hearing is GRANTED. ECF No. 64. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner Andrew Williams, Sr.s amended motion for discovery is GRANTED. ECF No. 65. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on or before March 30, 2018, the parties shall submit a joint proposed scheduling plan for discovery, a proposed date for an evidentiary hearing, and any further procedures, including any supplemental briefing, that the parties deem appropriate. ( Joint Scheduling Plan due by 3/30/2018.) Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 03/20/2018. (KCB)