Legal Opinion
Shieh v. Kakita
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided April 16, 1996No. 95-7587PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Per curiam
In these three petitions for certiorari, pro se petitioner Liang-Houh Shieh requests leave to proceed in forma pau-peris under Rule 39 of this Court. We deny his requests pursuant to Rule 39.8. Shieh is allowed until April 22, 1996, within which to pay the docketing fees required by Rule 38 and to submit his petitions in compliance with this Court’s Rule 33.1. We also direct the Clerk not to accept any further petitions for certiorari from Shieh in noncriminal matters unless he pays the docketing fee required by Rule 38 and submits his petition in compliance with Rule 33.1.
Shieh has abused…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Martin v. District of Columbia Court of AppealsSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
3Cited by23 opinions
- Jerardo Rodriguez v. David Cook, Director, Oregon State PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Roller v. GunnCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1997
- Frederick Lynwood Foley v. Ms. C. Fix Sergeant Santiago Ms. SwisherCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1997
- In Re Alfred J. VincentCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1997
- Mehdipour v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONSSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2004
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.