HOWARD v. FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION
Defendant: FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION
Petitioner: TYRONE M HOWARD
Case Number: 1:2009cv00056
Filed: February 24, 2009
Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Office: Habeas Corpus (General) Office
County: Lafayette
Presiding Judge: ALLAN KORNBLUM
Presiding Judge: MAURICE M PAUL
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 18, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER ADOPTING 18 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: 1 Petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED, and a certificat4e of appealability is DENIED.Signed by CHIEF JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on 3/18/2012. (jws)
Access additional case information on PACER

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

Access this case on the Florida Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: HOWARD v. FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: TYRONE M HOWARD
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: FLORIDA 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 [ 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?