Harris v. Sirmons

Harris v. Sirmons

Petitioner:	Jimmy Dean Harris
Respondent:	Marty Sirmons
Case Number:	5:2008cv00375
Filed:	April 10, 2008
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma
Office:	Death Penalty - Habeas Corpus Office
County:	Pittsburg
Presiding Judge:	Stephen P. Friot
Presiding Judge:	Gary M. Purcell
Nature of Suit:	None
Cause of Action:	Federal Question
Jury Demanded By:	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:

Date Filed	Document Text
January 19, 2021	Filing 119 ORDER re 88 USCA Opinion, the Tenth Circuit remanded this case with instructions to conduct an evidentiary hearing and consider certain threshold issues. Following a status conference, this Court instructed Petiti oner to prepare a pre-hearing opening brief addressing all procedural and legal issues that need to be resolved prior to the evidentiary hearing. Petitioner submitted his Pre-Hearing Opening Brief [Doc. No. 111], to which Respondent responded [Doc. No. 112] and Petitioner replied [Doc. No. 113]. Oral argument was held on January 8, 2021, as more fully set out. Signed by Honorable David L. Russell on 1/19/21. (jw)
April 19, 2017	Filing 77 MEMORANDUM OPINION. After a complete review of the transcripts, trial records, appellate record, record on post-conviction proceedings, briefs filed by Petitioner and Respondent, and the applicable law, the Court finds Petitioner's request for relief in 32 Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus should be denied. ACCORDINGLY, habeas relief is DENIED on all grounds. An appropriate judgment will be entered.. Signed by Honorable Stephen P. Friot on 4/19/2017. (llg)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 19, 2021

Filing 119 ORDER re 88 USCA Opinion, the Tenth Circuit remanded this case with instructions to conduct an evidentiary hearing and consider certain threshold issues. Following a status conference, this Court instructed Petiti oner to prepare a pre-hearing opening brief addressing all procedural and legal issues that need to be resolved prior to the evidentiary hearing. Petitioner submitted his Pre-Hearing Opening Brief [Doc. No. 111], to which Respondent responded [Doc. No. 112] and Petitioner replied [Doc. No. 113]. Oral argument was held on January 8, 2021, as more fully set out. Signed by Honorable David L. Russell on 1/19/21. (jw)

April 19, 2017

Filing 77 MEMORANDUM OPINION. After a complete review of the transcripts, trial records, appellate record, record on post-conviction proceedings, briefs filed by Petitioner and Respondent, and the applicable law, the Court finds Petitioner's request for relief in 32 Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus should be denied. ACCORDINGLY, habeas relief is DENIED on all grounds. An appropriate judgment will be entered.. Signed by Honorable Stephen P. Friot on 4/19/2017. (llg)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Harris v. Sirmons
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Jimmy Dean Harris
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: Marty Sirmons
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?