Dickinson v. Hobbs

Plaintiff: John Patrick Dickinson
Defendant: Ray Hobbs
Case Number: 5:2012cv00259
Filed: July 17, 2012
Court: Arkansas Eastern District Court
Office: Pine Bluff Office
County: Lincoln
Presiding Judge: Brian S. Miller
Referring Judge: H. David Young
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28:2254
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
November 19, 2012 11 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER ADOPTING 10 the proposed findings and recommended disposition; and dismissing John Patrick Dickinson's 1 petition for writ of habeas corpus with prejudice. In accordance with Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases In The United States District Courts, a certificate of appealability is denied. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 11/19/2012. (kdr)

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 Arkansas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Dickinson v. Hobbs
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Ray Hobbs
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 ]
Plaintiff: John Patrick Dickinson
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?