Winding v. King et al, No. 5:2005cv00178 - Document 168 (S.D. Miss. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER denying 160 Motion to Clarify; denying 161 Motion for Court Records at Government's Expense; denying 165 Motion for Copy of Habeas Corpus Petition; denying 166 Motion for All District Court Records; denying 167 Motion to File Out of Time Motion to Arrest Final Judgment. Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on 09/29/2010 (nr)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Winding v. King et al Doc. 168 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI WESTERN DIVISION JAMES C. WINDING, NO. K8115 PETITIONER versus CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:05-cv-178-DCB-MTP RONALD KING, Superintendent, and JIM HOOD, Attorney General RESPONDENTS ORDER This matter comes before the Court on the pro se Petitioner’s Motion for Clarification and Correct Final Judgment [docket entry no. 160], Motion for Court Records at Government Expense [docket entry no. 161], Motion for Copy of Habeas Corpus Petition [docket entry no. 165], Motion for All District Court Records [docket entry no. 166], and Motion to File Out of Time Motion to Arrest Final Judgment [docket entry no. 167]. This case arises out of Petitioner’s claim for relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court issued its final judgment dismissing the Petitioner’s claim with prejudice on July 3, 2007. Petitioner has subsequently filed numerous motions for reconsideration and motions for additional discovery, all of which this Court has denied. By filing these new motions, Petitioner seeks to reopen his case. The Court has reviewed Petitioner’s Motion for Clarification and Motion to File Out of Time Motion to Arrest Final Judgment and concludes that both are wholly without merit. Petitioner also seeks Court records at the Government’s Dockets.Justia.com expense and seeks Court records for which he has not paid (though he does not specifically Government’s expense). ask that they be copied at the Petitioner has already received copies of many, if not all, of the filings in this case and the Court has denied several recent motions for records at the Government’s expense. Accordingly, Petitioner’s current motions for records are not well-taken. The Court again refers Petitioner to the Local Rules of this Court for information on how to obtain copies of the record in this case. IT IS HEREBY Standard fees will apply. ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Clarification and Correct Final Judgment [docket entry no. 160] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Court Records at Government Expense [docket entry no. 161] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Copy of Habeas Corpus Petition [docket entry no. 165] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for All District Court Records [docket entry no. 166] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion to File Out of Time Motion to Arrest Final Judgment [docket no. 167] is DENIED. SO ORDERED, this the 29th day of September 2010. s/ David Bramlette UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
