Chandler v. Epps et al
| Joey Montrell Chandler |
| Christopher Epps and Attorney General of the State of Mississippi |
| 1:2008cv00093 |
| April 21, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi |
| Habeas Corpus (General) Office |
| Clay |
| Sharion Aycock |
| Jerry A. Davis |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
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
97
MEMORANDUM OPINION re 96 Order on Motion to Vacate, Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Order on Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 9/14/2010. (psk, USDC)
|
|
Filing
85
MEMORANDUM OPINION re 84 Judgment. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 5/13/2010. (psk, USDC)
|
|
Filing
55
ORDER denying 38 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting Report and Recommendations re 43 denying Motion for Summary Judgment and overruling objections. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 5/12/2009. (khj, USDC)
|
|
Filing
43
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 38 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Joey Montrell Chandler; Objections to R&R due by 5/4/2009. Signed by Mag. Judge Jerry A. Davis on 4/20/2009. (jkj, USDC)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER adopting 11 Report and Recommendations and overruling objections. This case is hereby STAYED for 90 days for the Petitioner to pursue relief in state court. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 10/22/2008. (psk, USDC)
|
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 Mississippi Northern 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.
