Shelton v. Apker
Petitioner: Raymond B Shelton
Respondent: Craig Apker
Case Number: 4:2011cv00444
Filed: July 25, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Pima
Presiding Judge: Charles R Pyle (PS)
Presiding Judge: Frank R Zapata
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
July 5, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 20 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 19 . The Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is hereby DENIED and judgment shall be entered accordingly. Signed by Senior Judge Frank R Zapata on 7/3713. (KAH)
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: Shelton v. Apker
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Raymond B Shelton
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: Craig Apker
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?