Roybal v. Roy
Petitioner: Kristopher Lee Roybal
Respondent: Tom Roy
Case Number: 0:2014cv05042
Filed: December 22, 2014
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: Rice
Presiding Judge: Tony N. Leung
Presiding Judge: Susan Richard Nelson
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 31, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER Adopting 23 Report and Recommendation: petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied; this action is dismissed with prejudice; and petitioner should NOT be granted a Certificate of Appealability. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Susan Richard Nelson on 08/31/2015. (SMD)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Roybal v. Roy
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Kristopher Lee Roybal
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Tom Roy
Represented By: James B Early
Represented By: Matthew Frank
Represented By: Peter R Marker
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?