Holloway v. Mingo
Plaintiff: Carlos Holloway
Defendant: Derrick Mingo
Case Number: 2:2013cv00049
Filed: March 15, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
Office: Hattiesburg Office
County: Marion
Presiding Judge: Michael T. Parker
Presiding Judge: Keith Starrett
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
May 22, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 12 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION dismissing Plaintiff's petition for failure to exhaust his available state remedies. A separate Judgment shall be entered pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by District Judge Keith Starrett on May 22, 2013 (dsl)
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 Mississippi Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Holloway v. Mingo
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Derrick Mingo
Represented By: Jim Hood
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 ]
Plaintiff: Carlos Holloway
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?