Jones v. USA
| Stephen T. Jones |
| USA |
| 4:1996cv00147 |
| June 24, 1996 |
| US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
| Shelby Office |
| Burke |
| Richard Voorhees |
| Motions to Vacate Sentence |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 |
| None |
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
33
ORDER dismissing as premature 32 Motion to Preserve the Right to Benefit from HR 2316 and the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010. Signed by District Judge Richard Voorhees on 8/8/11. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(ejb) NEF Regenerated to AUSA Amy Ray on 8/8/2011 (ejb).
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- 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: Jones v. USA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Stephen T. Jones | |
| 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: USA | |
| Represented By: | Jerry W. Miller AUSA |
| 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.
