Darryl Woods v. Raymond Booker
Petitioner - Appellant: DARRYL WOODS
Respondent - Appellee: RAYMOND BOOKER, Warden
Case Number: 09-1071
Filed: January 20, 2009
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Habeas Corpus

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
December 7, 2011 Darryl Woods v. Raymond Booker

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
December 7, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 6111149049 OPINION filed : we AFFIRM the district court's denial of the writ, decision not for publication pursuant to local rule 206. Damon J. Keith, Circuit Judge; Jeffrey S. Sutton, Circuit Judge and David W. McKeague, Circuit Judge, Authoring.
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: Darryl Woods v. Raymond Booker
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner - appellant: DARRYL WOODS
Represented By: Robert Thomas Razzano
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: RAYMOND BOOKER, Warden
Represented By: Laura A. Cook
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?