Briggs v. Hedgpeth
Petitioner: Marquez Briggs
Respondent: Anthony Hedgpeth
Case Number: 4:2011cv03237
Filed: June 30, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: Oakland Office
County: Monterey
Presiding Judge: Phyllis J. Hamilton
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 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
January 22, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER Denying Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 1/22/2013. (hlkS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/22/2013)
July 8, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 7/8/11. (pjhlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/8/2011)
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Briggs v. Hedgpeth
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Marquez Briggs
Represented By: Robert Joseph Beles
Represented By: Paul Gilruth McCarthy
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: Anthony Hedgpeth
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?