CANNON v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Plaintiff: CHARLES EDWARD CANNON
Defendant: STATE OF FLORIDA
Case Number: 5:2012cv00098
Filed: April 13, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Office: Panama City Office
County: Calhoun
Presiding Judge: GARY R JONES
Presiding Judge: RICHARD SMOAK
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
April 12, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER ADOPTING 28 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION denying 5 Petition for Habeas Corpus and granting 25 Motion to Dismiss signed by JUDGE MARK E WALKER on 4/11/13. The Clerk is directed to enter a judgment and close the case. (tss)
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 Florida Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: CANNON v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: STATE OF FLORIDA
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 ]
Plaintiff: CHARLES EDWARD CANNON
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?