Otis James Compton v. Warden Leroy Cartledge
Petitioner - Appellant:
OTIS JAMES COMPTON
Respondent - Appellee:
WARDEN LEROY CARTLEDGE
Case Number:
16-7420
Filed:
October 17, 2016
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 |
|---|---|
| March 10, 2017 | Otis James Compton v. Warden Leroy Cartledge |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Date Filed | # | Document Text |
|---|---|---|
| March 10, 2017 | 406433859 |
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999949941-2] Originating case number: 2:15-cv-03310-BHH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000039764]. Mailed to: Otis James Compton MCCORMICK CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION 386 Redemption Way McCormick, SC 29899-0000. [16-7420]
|
| Search for this case: Otis James Compton v. Warden Leroy Cartledge | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner - appellant: OTIS JAMES COMPTON | |
| Represented By: | Otis James Compton |
| 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 ] |
| Respondent - appellee: WARDEN LEROY CARTLEDGE | |
| 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 | [ 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.
