Tevis v. Sims
Joshua Lee Tevis |
Ravonne Sims |
5:2017cv00118 |
March 13, 2017 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
Lexington Office |
Oldham |
Robert E. Wier |
Joseph M. Hood |
General |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 25 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: (1) 22 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the Court's own; (2) Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; (3) No certificate of appealability shall issue from this Court. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on 7/13/2018.(JJ)cc: COR, pro se petitioner via USP Modified text on 7/13/2018 (JJ). |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Tevis v. Sims | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: Joshua Lee Tevis | |
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: Ravonne Sims | |
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.