Askew v. United States of America

Petitioner: James Willie Askew, III
Respondent: United States of America
Case Number: 1:2011cv08001
Filed: January 6, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Office: Eastern Office
County: Jefferson
Presiding Judge: L Scott Coogler
Presiding Judge: T Michael Putnam
Nature of Suit: Motions to Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
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
March 25, 2014 Filing 13 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge L Scott Coogler on 3/25/2014. (KAM, )
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 Alabama Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Askew v. United States of America
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: James Willie Askew, III
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: United States of America
Represented By: Enid D Athanas
Represented By: William Russell Chambers, Jr
Represented By: Joyce White Vance, US Attorney
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?