Beras v. Coakley
Petitioner: Roberto Beras
Respondent: Joe Coakley
Case Number: 4:2013cv00971
Filed: April 30, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Office: Youngstown Office
County: Columbiana
Presiding Judge: Jack Zouhary
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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
October 2, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 6 Amended Memorandum Opinion and Order re 4 Memorandum Opinion and Order. Text revised on page 7 (lines 20-21) as follows: Consequently, Cuellar does not require a finding that Petitioner is actually innocent of money laundering. Judge Jack Zouhary on 10/2/2013. (D,L)
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 Ohio Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Beras v. Coakley
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Roberto Beras
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: Joe Coakley
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?