No. 24-5289
Martin Robinson v. Ohio Medical Board, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-due-process judicial-misconduct jury-trial-right motion-for-counsel recusal-request supreme-court-procedure
Key Terms:
Immigration
Immigration
Latest Conference:
2024-09-30
Question Presented (from Petition)
Petitioner has MOTIONed FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND ORAL ARGUMENT, only to be ignored. Petitioner has demanded a jury trial, again, ignored.
Justices failed to recuse themselves after petitioner has made criminal complaint allegations against them and defendants/respondents. To date there has not been an investigation.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Supreme Court improperly denied petitioner's motions for counsel, jury trial, and judicial recusal despite allegations of judicial misconduct
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).
2024-08-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-08-22
Waiver of Ohio State Medical Board, et al. of right to respond submitted.
2024-08-22
Waiver of right of respondent Ohio State Medical Board, et al. to respond filed.
2024-06-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 9, 2024)
Attorneys
Martin Robinson
Martin Robinson — Petitioner
Ohio State Medical Board, et al.
Thomas Elliot Gaiser — Office of the Ohio Attorney General, Respondent