Cases

Chief Judge GIERKE delivered the opinion of the Court. Consistent with his pleas, Staff Sergeant John Stebbins was found guilty of rape of a child under the age of twelve on divers occasions and sodomy of a child under the age of twelve, in violation of Articles 120 and 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justic

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.

JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by the appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed December 18, 2012, be affirmed. Appellant has not established any basis for Federal Tor

wl FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT CoURT |)EC 1 3 mg FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA C|erk. U.S.hDis;Jtirict &t B;arékrluptit:,\'i t t t tri 0 num a David stebbins, ) C°`"S °f 6 3 ° ) Plaintiff, ) ) , ,` v. ) civil A¢ti@n N@. ,,’(},;;Q ) United States, ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff s complaint and the accompanying application to proceed in forma pauperis For the following reas0ns, the Court will grant the in forma pauperis

OPINION and ORDER HEWITT, Chief Judge. Before the court is plaintiffs Complaint (Complaint or Compl), Docket Number (Dkt. No.) 1, filed May 7, 2012.1 Plaintiff alleges that a federal judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Northern District of California) “performed a non judicial act, and also acted in the clea

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperisdenied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.

562 F.2d 39 U. S.v.Stebbins No. 77-1078 United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit 6/24/77 1 D.Vt. AFFIRMED

Case below, 543 Fed.Appx. 616.Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

Case below, 520 Fed.Appx. 589.Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.The CHIEF JUSTICE took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.

C. A. 9th Cir. Cer-­tiorari denied.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperisdenied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

176 B.R. 784 (1994) In re Catherine B. STEBBINS-HOPF, Debtor. Catherine B. STEBBINS-HOPF, Plaintiff, v. TEXAS GUARANTEED STUDENT LOAN CORPORATION, Defendant. Bankruptcy No. 92-53234-RBK. Adv. No. 93-5180-RBK. United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas, San Antonio Division. September 29, 1994. *785 David T. Cain, San Antonio,

FIFLF..D Mxrl:ozov» UNITED sTATEs DISTRICT CoURT cm, u.s. nas- .~m i_;. sannupwy FoR THE DISTRICT oF COLUMBIA °°"""°'“‘°['“""“"°' °°'"'“"'° David Stebbins, ) Plaintiff, § v. j Civil Action No. /g"' Hazel Keahea, j Defendant. j MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff’s complaint and the accompanying application to proceed in forma pauperis For the following reasons, the Court will grant the informer pauperis application and will dismiss this actio

JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s orders filed May 28, 2014, and June 30, 2014, be affirmed. Appellant provides no basis for his claims u