MENTER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Petitioner: DERRICK MENTER
Respondent: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Case Number: 1:2012cv07526
Filed: December 7, 2012
Court: New Jersey District Court
Office: Camden Office
County: Camden
Presiding Judge: Harvey Bartle III (EDPA)
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28:2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
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
January 30, 2013 4 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM AND ORDER That the 1 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255) filed by DERRICK MENTER is DENIED and no certificate of appealability will issue. Signed by Chief Judge Harvey Bartle III (EDPA) on 01/30/2013. (db, )

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 New Jersey District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: MENTER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: DERRICK MENTER
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: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Represented By: JOSEPH J. KHAN
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.