Opinion
OCTOBER 1, 2001
No. 01-5164 THOMAS v. WETHERINGTON, COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL. C.A. 11th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and certiorari dismissed. See this Court's Rule 39.8.
No. 01-5244 FORDJOUR v. FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION ET AL. C.A. 9th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and certiorari dismissed. See this Court's Rule 39.8.
No. 01-5404 HEMMERLE v. LAUDERDALE REPORTING SERVICE. Sup.Ct. Fla. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed informa pauperis denied, and certiorari dismissed. See this Court's Rule 39.8.
No. 00-9894 VARGAS v. GEORGIA. Sup.Ct. Gwinnett County, Ga. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and certiorari dismissed. See this Court's Rule 39.8. As 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). JUSTICE STEVENS dissents. See id., at 4, and cases cited therein.
No. 00-9927 HIGGASON v. HANKS, SUPERINTENDENT, WABASH VALLEY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY (two judgments). C.A. 7th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and certiorari dismissed. See 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). JUSTICE STEVENS dissents. See id., at 4, and cases cited therein.
No. 00-10308 HEAD v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 4th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and certiorari dismissed. See this Court's Rule 39.8. As 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). JUSTICE STEVENS dissents. See id., at 4, and cases cited therein.