DeGlace v. Warden
Carlos DeGlace |
Warden |
6:2013cv00189 |
September 25, 2013 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
London Office |
Clay |
PSO |
Gregory F. Van Tatenhove |
General |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 3 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1. Carlos DeGlace's petition for a writ of bebeas corpus 1 is DENIED; 2. Court will enter an appropriate jgm; and 3. This habeas proceeding is DISMISSSED and STRICKEN from the Court's docket. Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove on 11/5/2013.(RBB)cc: COR, paper copy to pro se filer, Carlos DeGlace, via US Mail. |
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: DeGlace v. Warden | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: Carlos DeGlace | |
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: Warden | |
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.