HORTON v. U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION
Petitioner: GREGROY W. HORTON
Respondent: U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION
Case Number: 1:2008cv00548
Filed: March 26, 2008
Court: US District Court for the District of Columbia
Office: Habeas Corpus (General) Office
County: 88888
Presiding Judge: Paul L. Friedman
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 21, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 32 MEMORANDUM OPINION denying application for a writ of habeas corpus. A separate order accompanies this memorandum opinion. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on September 21, 2009. (MA)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the District Of Columbia District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: HORTON v. U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: GREGROY W. HORTON
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: U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION
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?