No. 20-6217
Adrian Rangel v. Steven P. Meyer, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appeals civil-procedure civil-rights court-jurisdiction due-process federal-appeals federal-courts judicial-review legal-procedure state-courts trial-rights
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2021-01-08
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did Petitioner Adrian Rangel receive meaningful due process?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Did Petitioner Adrian Rangel receive “meaningful due process” from the Tippecanoe County, Indiana Superior Trial Court 2, the Indiana Court of Appeals, the Hammond Indiana Federal District Court and the United States Seventh Circuit Court Of Appeals? Page 1 of 23
Docket Entries
2021-01-11
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
2020-12-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-12-02
Waiver of right of respondent Steven P. Meyer, et al. to respond filed.
2020-10-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 7, 2020)
Attorneys
Adrian Rangel
Adrian Garcia Rangel — Petitioner
Steven P. Meyer, et al.
Aaron Thomas Craft — Office of the Indiana Attorney General, Respondent