VANCLEAVE v. BUGHER et al
| GREGORY VANCLEAVE |
| ROBERT BUGHER, GAGNON, STANLEY KNIGHT and C. A. PENFOLD |
| 1:2017cv00039 |
| January 5, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Tim A. Baker |
| William T. Lawrence |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
13
Entry Denying Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus And Directing Entry of Final Judgment - Gregory VanCleave, an inmate in the Indiana Department of Corrections (IDOC), petitions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for the reversal of certain discipli nary sanctions he received in IDOC proceeding number IYC-16-08-0195. Mr. VanCleave was found guilty of possession or use of a controlled substance while he was incarcerated at the Plainfield Correctional Facility. His petition, for the reasons expl ained below, is denied. Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue. The clerk is directed to update the docket to reflect the Petitioner's change of address as indicated in the distribution list below. The clerk is also directed to up date the docket to reflect the sole respondent as identified in this Entry's caption, pursuant to the automatic substitution of parties under Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d). Copy to petitioner via US Mail. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 3/13/2017.(RSF)
|
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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
