Tapia v. Smith
Petitioner: Israel Tapia
Respondent: Dennis Smith
Case Number: 2:2011cv02314
Filed: November 23, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: David G Campbell
Presiding Judge: Mark E Aspey
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241
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
April 19, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is denied. A certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied. The Clerk is directed to terminate this action. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 4/19/12. (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: Tapia v. Smith
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Israel Tapia
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: Dennis Smith
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?