Davis v. Crow et al (INMATE 1)
Plaintiff: Glennie Dee Davis
Defendant: Steven T. Marshall and John Crow
Case Number: 2:2018cv00905
Filed: October 23, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama
Presiding Judge: Gray M Borden
Referring Judge: Myron H Thompson
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 30, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 30, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 6 JUDGMENT, in accordance with the memorandum opinion entered this date, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that: (1) the #4 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge is adopted; (2) the #1 petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed because the required permission has not been obtained from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals; further ORDERING that costs are taxed against petitioner, for which execution may issue; directing the clerk to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the FRCP; this case is closed. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 11/30/18. (Attachments: #1 civil appeals checklist)(djy, )
November 30, 2018 Filing 5 OPINION. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 11/30/18. (djy, )
November 29, 2018 No objections filed to #4 report and recommendation (NO PDF document attached to this notice). (djy, )
November 2, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 4 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that: (1) The 28 U.S.C. 2241 petition for habeas corpus relief filed by Glennie Dee Davis on October 16, 2018 be DENIED; (2) This cause of action be DISMISSED in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 2244(b)(3)(A) as Davis has failed to obtain the requisite order from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals authorizing this court to consider a successive habeas application ; Objections to R&R due by 11/16/2018. Signed by Honorable Judge Gray M. Borden on 11/2/18. (djy, )
October 24, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER ON MOTION granting #2 motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Honorable Judge Gray M. Borden on 10/24/18. (djy, )
October 23, 2018 Filing 2 Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit by Glennie Dee Davis. (beh, )
October 23, 2018 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Glennie Dee Davis. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Memorandum)(beh, )

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 Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Davis v. Crow et al (INMATE 1)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Glennie Dee Davis
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 ]
Defendant: Steven T. Marshall
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 ]
Defendant: John Crow
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.


Why Is My Information Online?