Rogers v. Kemper
Filing
37
ORDER DENYING 35 Motion for Correction or Modification of the Appellate Record and DENYING Motion to Consolidate, signed by Chief Judge William C. Griesbach. (cc: all counsel) (Griesbach, William)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
TONY PHILLIP ROGERS,
Petitioner,
v.
Case No. 17-C-446
PAUL KEMPER, Warden,
Respondent.
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR CORRECTION OR
MODIFICATION OF APPELLATE RECORD
Petitioner Tony Rogers has filed a motion for correction or modification of the appellate
record pursuant to Rule 10(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. The motion is denied.
No supplementation of the record is necessary. The state court proceedings, to the extent they were
considered by this court, are a matter of record. This includes transcripts of hearings that were in
front of the state court, as well as the documents and pleadings that were filed in this court.
Petitioner has already designated the entire record for the purposes of his appeal, and thus is free to
cite to any portion of the record that he believes supports his contentions and claim of error.
Petitioner also asks that cases 17-C-446 and 17-CV-446 be consolidated under one case
number to ensure all information is transferred to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
In fact, both numbers refer to the same case. The letters āCā and āCVā to designate civil cases
appear to be used interchangeably by counsel and the courts. Documents bearing either notation are
filed in the same docket.
In sum, petitioner has failed to designate any evidence or document that is not already a
matter of record before this court. His motion is therefore denied.
SO ORDERED this
22nd
day of October, 2018.
s/ William C. Griesbach
William C. Griesbach, Chief Judge
United States District Court
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?