Lamar v. Hetzel

Petitioner: Dennis Earl Lamar
Respondent: Gary Hetzel
Case Number: 1:2013cv00422
Filed: August 14, 2013
Court: Alabama Southern District Court
Office: Mobile Office
County: Mobile
Referring Judge: William E. Cassady
Presiding Judge: William H. Steele
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28:2254 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
June 9, 2014 22 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT: It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that petitioner's rights were not violated in this cause and that his request for federal habeas corpus relief is DENIED. Petitioner is not entitled to a certificate of appealability and, therefore, he is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 6/9/2014. Copy mailed to Petitioner. (tgw)

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lamar v. Hetzel
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Dennis Earl Lamar
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Gary Hetzel
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 [ 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?