WILLIAMS v. SUPERINTENDENT
Petitioner: DWIGHT WILLIAMS
Respondent: SUPERINTENDENT
Case Number: 1:2017cv01005
Filed: March 31, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge: Mark J. Dinsmore
Presiding Judge: Tanya Walton Pratt
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 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
August 15, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 15 CLOSED JUDGMENT in favor of the respondent and against the petitioner, Dwight Williams. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/15/2017 (dist made)(CBU)
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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: WILLIAMS v. SUPERINTENDENT
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: SUPERINTENDENT
Represented By: Abigail T. Rom
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 ]
Petitioner: DWIGHT WILLIAMS
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?