Sanford v. Bottoms

Petitioner: Dominique Nathaniel Sanford
Respondent: Dan Bottoms
Case Number: 5:2013cv00083
Filed: March 27, 2013
Court: Kentucky Eastern District Court
Office: Lexington Office
County: Fayette
Presiding Judge: Joseph M. Hood
Referring Judge: Hanly A. Ingram
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
August 7, 2013 5 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1) The Magistrate Judge's 4 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. 2) Pet's 1 Petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 3) No certificate of appealability will issue; and 4) Clerk shall STRIKE this matter from the active docket. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on 08/07/2013. (KLB) cc: COR

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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Sanford v. Bottoms
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Dominique Nathaniel Sanford
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: Dan Bottoms
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.