Sheppard v. Mannor, No. 7:2014cv00547 - Document 2 (W.D. Va. 2014)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Glen E. Conrad on 10/16/2014. (kab)

Download PDF
e ='Pé lfils k 4,,S).'<I *' ' tk ? e1 'tf c k '' . 1 t' AT RC : )' ,l J % t7 bh %( t . r) ' ' f t' I TH E UNI N TED STATES DI STRI COURT CT FOR THE W ESTERN DI STRI O F VI CT RGI A NI ROANOKE DI I ON V SI LLOYD W AYNE SH EPPARD, 0CT 1 2 1 , . t: 7. JULA C. . .f i JL I ' .- . ERK t BY; DEP CLERK CASE NO .7: 14CV00547 Pe i i r, t tone M EM O M N DU M O PI O N NI OE AN M A xx o R coMMoNwE ! sATTORNEV, AtTH, By: G l E .Conrad en Chi U ni St esD i t ctJudge ef ted at s ri R espondent . Ll W a oyd yne She r a Vig ni i a e pr ee ng pr K ,fl a pladi t he ppa d, r i a nm t oc di o ied e ng hat ttes G OTI il : I M ON FOR O RD ER TO SH O W CA U SE Re: V A CATI ON O F J D GM EN T/ U ORDER.' Be us t spl di c le st valdiy ofhi sae c tco c i t c rt ' ca e hi ea ng hal nge he i t s t t our nviton, he ou c tu a doc t d She r ss iso a ape ii f am ' ofha sc us plrua onsr ed nd ke e ppa d' ubm s i n s tton or i t bea om , zs nt ha he ii t iy s s e t 28 U. C. j225 The c r tnds t t t petton m us be summ arl dimi s d as o S. 4. ou t i s es i , purua t 28U. C. 22444 l ucc s ve s nt o S. j 1 9. S p m' c aln e t v ldt o hs c n i e n u d r a 2 0 j d me t o t he p d h le g s he ai iy f i o fn me t n e 0 9 u g n f he M on gome y Count Cic tCour whih convit d hi of a a t d m alc ous woundi of t r y r ui t c ce m ggr va e ii ng hi i a s a s e e hi t 30 ye r i ionme wih 1 yea s s pe s nf nt on nd entnc d m o a s mprs nt t 5 r us nded. She r ppa d as e t t t he has ne y di c r d e d e i t f m of decar tons by t e m e c l s rs ha wl s ove e vi enc n he or l ai hr e di a doc or a t tmony fom a s ints,2 evi nc he cai swils t s nd esi r ce it de e lm l how t thi a tons di not ha s c i d c u et eijlist hi ifn s n. a s h nt e o s na t o r Sheppard v. Mannor Doc. 2 1 Un e Rue4()o te Rue Go rig j2 4 Cae ,tec utma smmmiy ds s a 92 4 d r l b f h ls venn 25 ss h o r y u l imis 25 p t i n tifi pli y a pe r fo t ep tto a d a y atc e e h bt t a t ep t i n ri no e t l dt r le e i o ç j t anl p a s r m h e i n n n ta h d x i is h t h e i o e s t n i e o eif t l i t t i t dititcour ' n he src t' 2 She d doesnoti l a tda t fom a oft me ca pr esi son whos o ni hecl m s ppar ncude fi vis r ny he di l of sonal e pi ons ai acuali e t nnoc nce. Be us hi pe iin mus be dimis a s es i howe ,t abs nc oft ematral ca e s tto t s sed s ucc sve, ver he e e hes ei s fom t r or i notmae ilt t c tsr lng. r he ec d s tra o he our' ui Dockets.Justia.com

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.