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

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

17-383 - Blanton v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
17-383 - Blanton v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
April 7, 2017
PDF | More
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation: The petition for writ of habeas corpus filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 should be TRANSFERRED to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit pursuant to Henderson v. Haro, 282 F.3d 862, 864 (5th Cir. 2002) and In re Epps, 127 F.3d 364, 365 (5th Cir. 1997). (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez on 4/7/2017) (mcrd) (Main Document 16 replaced on 4/7/2017) (mcrd).
May 22, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER ACCEPTING 16 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. (Ordered by Judge Jane J. Boyle on 5/22/2017) (twd)
July 5, 2017
PDF | More
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation re: the petitioner's 29 Motion for Leave to File a Motion to Recall Void Transferred 2254 Motion. Petitioner's motion should be construed as a Rule 59(e) motion and DENIED. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez on 7/5/2017) (mcrd)
July 20, 2017
PDF | More
Findings and Recommendations on Motion re: 36 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Petitioner argues that he should be exempt from paying the filing fee on appeal because the order transferring the habeas case to this Court from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas was void. He does not point to any statute or rule exempting him from the appellate filing fee. He is not exempt from paying the filing fee, and his motion to be exempt should be DENIED. To the extent that the motion is construed as a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, it should be DENIED, because the Court should certify pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that the appeal is not taken in good faith and that the appeal presents no legal points of arguable merit and is therefore frivolous. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez on 7/20/2017) (axm)
August 9, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER ACCEPTING 33 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE re: 29 Motion for Leave to File A Motion to Recall Transferred 2254 Motion. The petitioner's motion is construed as arising under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) and is hereby DENIED. (Ordered by Judge Jane J. Boyle on 8/9/2017) (axm)
August 15, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER OF THE COURT ON 37 RECOMMENDATION REGARDING REQUEST TO PROCEED ON APPEAL WITHOUT PAYMENT OF FILING FEE AND REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL: The application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis onappeal (doc. 36) is DENIED because the Court certifies pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that the appeal is not taken in good faith and that the appeal presents no legal points of arguable merit and is therefore frivolous. [Clerk electronically notified Fifth Circuit re:36 Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis] (Ordered by Judge Jane J. Boyle on 8/15/2017) (sss)