David Heath v. Robert Stevenson
| DAVID HEATH |
| WARDEN ROBERT STEVENSON |
| 16-7652 |
| November 29, 2016 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit |
| Habeas Corpus |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
406673653
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for abeyance (Local Rule 12(d)) [1000036088-2]; denying Motion to remand case [1000002139-3]; denying a certificate of appealability. Originating case number: 8:15-cv-02342-TMC. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000150209]. Mailed to: David Heath. [16-7652]
|
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: David Heath v. Robert Stevenson | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner - appellant: DAVID HEATH | |
| Represented By: | David Heath |
| 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: WARDEN ROBERT STEVENSON | |
| Represented By: | William Edgar Salter |
| 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 ] |
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.
