Wilson v. Sirmons, et al
Case Number: 4:2000cv00147
Filed: February 16, 2000
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma
Office: Death Penalty - Habeas Corpus Office
Presiding Judge: Claire V Eagan
Presiding Judge: Frank H McCarthy
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 28:2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
February 23, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 89 OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Claire V Eagan that Wilson's petition for habeas corpus relief based on ineffective assistnce of counsel (Dkt. # 16) is denied; granting (Dkt. #81) Wilson's motion to expand the record ; gra nting 81 Motion for Miscellaneous Relief (Re: 41 Decision from Circuit Court, 30 Judgment, Entering Judgment, 40 Decision from Circuit Court, 88 Exhibit(s) in Support of Document(s), 16 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 87 Exhibit(s) in Support of Document(s), Exhibit(s) in Support of Document(s), 76 Minutes of Evidentiary Hearing,, Setting/Resetting Deadline(s)/Hearing(s), Setting/Resetting Deadline(s)/Hearing(s),, 42 Mandate from Circuit Court ) (RGG, Chambers)
July 27, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 75 OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Claire V Eagan ; granting 73 Motion in Limine (RGG, Chambers)
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 Oklahoma Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wilson v. Sirmons, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?