No. 19-6874

In Re Stephen Daniel Leonard

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2019-12-06
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: 28-usc-1915 abuse-of-discretion appellate-procedure circuit-court-jurisdiction civil-rights due-process federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure in-forma-pauperis judicial-discretion judicial-power pro-se-litigation standing three-strikes three-strikes-provision
Latest Conference: 2020-04-24 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

1.) Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit abuse its discretion when refusing to file the
Petitioner 's Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis
on appeal pursuant to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure
Rule 24(a)(5)?

2. ) Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit abuse its discretion when reviewing Petitioner 's
appeal under the three strikes provision of 28 U.S.C. §
1915(g)?

3. ) Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit violate domestic and international laws when
refusing Petitioner 's pleadings and closing the case?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Eleventh Circuit abused its discretion in refusing to file the petitioner's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal

Docket Entries

2020-04-27
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner DENIED.
2020-04-08
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/24/2020.
2020-02-11
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner.
2020-01-21
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of mandamus is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
2019-12-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/17/2020.
2019-12-23
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-11-15
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 6, 2020)

Attorneys

Stephen Leonard
Stephen D. Leonard — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent