Charles Anthony Ball v. Mike Slagle

Petitioner - Appellant: CHARLES ANTHONY BALL
Respondent - Appellee: MIKE SLAGLE, Correctional Administrator
Case Number: 16-7422
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 FiledDescription
January 20, 2017 Charles Ball v. Mike Slagle

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
January 20, 2017 406364406 Opinion or Order of the Court UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999950820-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999957448-2] Originating case number: 1:16-cv-00045-FDW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000007283]. Mailed to: Charles Anthony Ball MOUNTAIN VIEW CORRECTIONAL FACILITY 545 Amity Park Road Spruce Pine, NC 28777-0000. [16-7422]
Search for this case: Charles Anthony Ball v. Mike Slagle
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner - appellant: CHARLES ANTHONY BALL
Represented By: Charles Anthony Ball
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: MIKE SLAGLE, Correctional Administrator
Represented By:
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.


Why Is My Information Online?