Carter v. Duncan

Petitioner: Robert S Carter
Respondent: David Duncan
Case Number: 4:2009cv00590
Filed: October 14, 2009
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Graham
Referring Judge: Charles R Pyle (PS)
Presiding Judge: John M Roll
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
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 23, 2011 21 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER ADOPTING IN WHOLE 20 Report and Recommendations, Denying as Moot 19 Motion for Miscellaneous Relief filed by Robert S Carter, ; Denied as Moot re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State/2254) ; Clerk to enter Judgment and dismiss case. Signed by Judge A Wallace Tashima on 6/22/11. (SMBE)

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: Carter v. Duncan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Robert S Carter
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: David Duncan
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?