No. 23-7813

John Ragin v. Chadwick Dotson, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, et al.

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2024-06-27
Status: Dismissed
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: administrative-law brady-violation constitutional-law due-process exculpatory-evidence ineffective-assistance-of-counsel judicial-review legal-procedure precedent prosecutorial-misconduct right-to-a-fair-trial statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities
Latest Conference: 2024-09-30
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Question not identified

Question Presented (from Petition)

No question identified. : | 0) ee ra ee ae tN Doe o (Cy ses hpi the outa waleg Are ee ore o_o 2b oe Vivutes 0 7 Uy M n A\ . Ss 10 ‘ nly a a ao ~b walar) it ide b:(o0\ ih New . ; Oi allt Yo bd, Decent un ) ‘ ay bw CL> —— 4. Does g Ant Nes “ 0) ne Fo) bo _ Doris \ g Sui Yor oflancos Sb i \sea ; ; i , Sone \wentinor We, obhuds sy WiAon At ee _ YS.0.5 BW, “The Wawordald Leduration | 0 Dees the etibence Luionalpevduded of sessed inte. hn Demis _ Me @ ulate intentions None fememk —_ Boje soba ty ttl contltendh ee Moe Ino’ ess Win Whe eonacXinn oF g {con _w hiss Tonocen) “to aheo? We 4 rea Sion BF fees eamcented ta _) Doos counaeh_ovle(GMing tre. Sidee Ys veetify _ On A ee eahunke a Cole wong evfor Wop _ eel sie tone Mon_ o_o fassng —_ pic wow 2 , Xe apielodce. BS she. eciNenc, when — _ We: hee eon 2s amseente was eS ent Incense a nel blest i) reve was nokaag wit susah in dhe ned Wout lave Mo | a tipdain desta Se. Cy _ Se _ Wada Sicinys Vid0 nie ond an (oya~wiintAsy a he \ a Wo on on <r ailinés) ay ao Sa he ecard), sean Wa on She inbefsboe foun 00-15 by, “Huo Sites, fuady ND Ate Mewilok CaRe violate Whe as Lig Yo ahah and. Sash’ Ince indie Tp WSeG Bur hy Sea “US Atshon is those all he. {Sickue bace\ Wal show ackika CnmocenceS ond inter dye. assistance SF counsel _ as cause ond budiee Ye r ‘te excise ea ped Gg? {WY Mee \ a Au) 2 WAINNANT ON MyM Joh er Nate 3 \s \ Wb \ aod Loili@enc bik = den onsWave. We lis FS cols neces : ah aca (oli. ‘asta ond ooo i gt I sypb INN) to asad. Yoo Ait me Lp Woo Vena ad Crs _R) wae A yelled Se SS cgastiinel Rls. doles dF _ “Dun darageal Cdostednvatongh | sel yt

Docket Entries

2024-10-07
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. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
2024-08-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-05-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 29, 2024)

Attorneys

John Ragin
John M. Ragin — Petitioner
John M. Ragin — Petitioner