Harris v. Randolph
Petitioner: Jawanza L Harris
Respondent: Austin Randolph
Case Number: 2:2008cv02306
Filed: December 24, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Central District of Illinois
Office: Habeas Corpus (General) Office
County: Logan
Presiding Judge: David G. Bernthal
Presiding Judge: Michael P. McCuskey
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
January 7, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 10 JUDGMENT in favor of Austin Randolph and against Jawanza L Harris. Case terminated. Copy mailed to pro se petitioner at Logan Correctional Center Inmate Mail/Parcels RR 3, Box 1000 Lincoln, IL 62656 (KW, ilcd)
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 Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Harris v. Randolph
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Jawanza L Harris
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: Austin Randolph
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?