No. 18-6020
Stefan Rodgers v. Darrell Miller, Warden
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: civil-procedure consideration due-process fair-trial judicial-review legal-standards rule-10 standing supreme-court-procedure tribunal-fairness tribunals
Key Terms:
DueProcess FourthAmendment HabeasCorpus
DueProcess FourthAmendment HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-02-15
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did each of the tribunals rule fairly within the Consideration of Rule 10 (a), (b), (c) of the Supreme Court?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED : 1. Each and every point is stated within the petition for writ of certiorari. 2. Did each of the tribunals rule fairly within the Consideration of Rule 10 (a), (b), (c) of the Supreme Court?
Docket Entries
2019-02-19
Rehearing DENIED.
2019-01-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2018-11-09
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2018-10-15
Petition DENIED.
2018-09-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/12/2018.
2018-09-24
Waiver of right of respondent Darrell Miller to respond filed.
2018-07-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 19, 2018)
Attorneys
Darrell Miller
Toby Jay Heytens — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Stefan Rodgers
Stefan Rodgers — Petitioner