Harris v. Harrington

Petitioner: Anthony Swayne Harris
Respondent: Rick Harrington
Case Number: 2:2013cv02105
Filed: May 10, 2013
Court: Illinois Central District Court
Office: Urbana Office
County: Randolph
Referring Judge: David G. Bernthal
Presiding Judge: Michael P. McCuskey
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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 1, 2014 12 Opinion or Order of the Court OPINION entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 4/1/2014. Petitioner's Motion to Stay in Abeyance 3 is DENIED. Petitioner's Petition Under 28 U.S.C. 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody 1 is DENIED. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. This case is terminated. See written opinion. Copy of opinion to pro se petitioner by way of e-filing project. (DS, 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. Harrington
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Anthony Swayne 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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Rick Harrington
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 [ 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.