No. 19-5377

Fairly W. Earls v. United States

Lower Court: Seventh Circuit
Docketed: 2019-07-30
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: circuit-split circuit-splits civil-procedure constitutional-rights criminal-justice-system criminal-procedure federal-rules-of-civil-procedure habeas-corpus rule-60(b)(6) rule-60b6
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Criminal Justice System allows Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in Habeas Corpus Cases

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Fairly W. Earls completed satisfaction of his criminal judgment case raises a pressing issuance of National Importance: Whether and to what extent the Criminal Justice System does not allow Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules in Habeas Corpus Cases. Specifically, did the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit impose an improper and unduly burdensome review Standard that Contrvenes with this Court's precedent and deepens circuit splits when it Denied Mr. Earls Rule 60(b)(6) Motion by deciding that Federal Rules of Civil Procedures are not allowed in Criminal cases, thereby denying Mr. Earls his Constitutional Right to be Free from continued restraits when his judgment has been satisfied. -1 TABLE OF CONTENT Question Presented for Review .e1 Table of Content . cece cece eee eee ed Index of Appendices .. cee eee eee eee 3 Table of Authority . cece ee eee eee 4 Opinions ©... eee eeccee ee cere rere eee eed Jurisdiction Statement .eee ee eee eed . Constitutional and Statutory .6 .

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-08-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-08-07
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-05-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 29, 2019)

Attorneys

Fairly W. Earls
Fairly W. Earls — Petitioner
Fairly W. Earls — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent