Roach v. Jenkins et al
Plaintiff: Timothy Roach
Defendant: Lepher Jenkins
Case Number: 3:2007cv00198
Filed: April 12, 2007
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
Office: Jackson Office
County: Hinds
Presiding Judge: Daniel P. Jordan
Presiding Judge: James C. Sumner
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
November 3, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 38 JUDGMENT in favor of Lepher Jenkins against Timothy Roach, and that this action is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by District Judge Daniel P. Jordan, III on 11/3/09 (SEC)
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 Mississippi Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Roach v. Jenkins et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Timothy Roach
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 ]
Defendant: Lepher Jenkins
Represented By: Jerrolyn M. Owens
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?