Legal Opinion

Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided November 2, 1992No. 92-5584PublishedCited by 795 opinions

1Per curiam

Pro se petitioner James L. Martin requests leave to proceed in forma pauperis under Rule 39 of this Court. We deny this request pursuant to our Rule 39.8. Martin is al*2lowed until November 23, 1992, within which to pay the-docketing fees required by Rule 38 and to submit his petitions in compliance with this Court’s Rule 33. We also, direct the Clerk not to accept any further petitions for certio-rari from Martin in noncriminal matters unless he pays the docketing fee required by Rule 38 and submits his petition in compliance with Rule 33.

Martin is a notorious abuser of this Court’s certiorari…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In re McDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. In Re SindramSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Zatko v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. Martin v. Knox Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Martin v. DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1992

3Cited by795 opinions

  1. Artuz v. BennettSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Jerardo Rodriguez v. David Cook, Director, Oregon State PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
  3. Melvin P. Deutsch v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
  4. In Re Anthony R. Martin-Trigona, Movant. In Re George Sassower, MovantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
  5. Gladys L. Cok v. Family Court of Rhode IslandCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993

790 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API