Dean Gamble, Sr. v. Adrian Hoke
Petitioner - Appellant: DEAN E. GAMBLE, SR.
Respondent - Appellee: ADRIAN HOKE, Warden
Case Number: 11-7327
Filed: October 4, 2011
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
April 2, 2012 Dean Gamble, Sr. v. Adrian Hoke

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
April 2, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 403835143 UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998742466-2] Originating case number: 2:10-cv-00690 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998823330]. Mailed to: Dean Gamble, Sr.. [11-7327]
Access additional case information on PACER

Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Search for this case: Dean Gamble, Sr. v. Adrian Hoke
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner - appellant: DEAN E. GAMBLE, SR.
Represented By: Dean E. Gamble
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 - appellee: ADRIAN HOKE, Warden
Represented By: Robert David Goldberg
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?