Charley v. Schriro

Petitioner: Jeffrey Michael Charley
Respondent: Dora Shriro
Case Number: 2:2007cv00844
Filed: April 23, 2007
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Referring Judge: Edward C Voss (PS)
Presiding Judge: Neil V Wake
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
September 3, 2008 15 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8 . That the Clerk of the Court enter judgment denying Petitioners Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 1 and dismissing it with prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate this action.. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 9/2/08. (DMT, )

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

Search for this case: Charley v. Schriro
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Jeffrey Michael Charley
Represented By: Ulises A Ferragut, Jr
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: Dora Shriro
Represented By: Michael Tighe O'Toole
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?