Harwood v. Hall
Petitioner: Jeremy Lorren Harwood
Respondent: Gary Hall
Case Number: 6:2015cv00970
Filed: June 3, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Oregon
Office: Eugene (6) Office
Presiding Judge: Marco A. Hernandez
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
August 28, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 51 OPINION AND ORDER: The Petition for Writ ofHabeas Corpus 1 is denied. The court grants a certificate of appealability as to the issues addressed in Parts II, III, and IV of this Opinion. (See 18 page opinion for more information) Signed on 8/28/17 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (dsg)
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 Oregon District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Harwood v. Hall
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Gary Hall
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 ]
Petitioner: Jeremy Lorren Harwood
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?