Alex Romero Watson, Jr v. P.O. Brazelton
Petitioner: Alex Romero Watson, Jr
Respondent: P D Brazelton
Case Number: 5:2013cv00586
Filed: March 29, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Jacqueline Chooljian
Presiding Judge: George H. Wu
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
April 17, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 21 JUDGMENT by Judge George H. Wu. Pursuant to this Court's Order Accepting Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge, IT IS ADJUDGED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied and this action is dismissed with prejudice. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (dml)
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 California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Alex Romero Watson, Jr v. P.O. Brazelton
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: P D Brazelton
Represented By: Heidi T Salerno
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 ]
Petitioner: Alex Romero Watson, 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 [ 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?