Randolph Baird v. April Chapman
Respondent: COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, KIT CARSON CORRECTIONAL CENTER, HENRY MCMASTER, (actually named as The Attorney General of the State of: South Carolina, Henry McMaster) and JOE WOLFE, Future Custody, South Carolina Department of Parole and Probation, Agent
Petitioner - Appellant: RANDOLPH STEPHEN BAIRD
Respondent - Appellee: APRIL CHAPMAN, Warden and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Case Number: 11-7462
Filed: November 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 Randolph Baird v. April Chapman

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April 2, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 403834886 UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 1:11-cv-01217-JFA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998823231]. Mailed to: Randolph S. Baird. [11-7462]
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: Randolph Baird v. April Chapman
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner - appellant: RANDOLPH STEPHEN BAIRD
Represented By: Randolph Stephen Baird
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: APRIL CHAPMAN, Warden
Represented By: Donald John Zelenka
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: ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Represented By: James Anthony Mabry
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: COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
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: KIT CARSON CORRECTIONAL CENTER
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: HENRY MCMASTER, (actually named as The Attorney General of the State of: South Carolina, Henry McMaster)
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: JOE WOLFE, Future Custody, South Carolina Department of Parole and Probation, Agent
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?