Ardizzone v. Jones et al
Petitioner: Marty Ray Ardizzone
Respondent: Justin Jones
Case Number: 5:2012cv00913
Filed: August 20, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma
Office: Oklahoma City Office
County: Hughes
Presiding Judge: Joe Heaton
Presiding Judge: Gary M. Purcell
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
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
December 3, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 16 of Magistrate Judge Gary Purcell and grants respondent's motion 12 to dismiss...the petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. Signed by Honorable Joe Heaton on 12/03/2012. (lam)
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: Ardizzone v. Jones et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Marty Ray Ardizzone
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: Justin Jones
Represented By: Theodore M Peeper
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?