Odoms v. Oregon State Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
Petitioner: Donald Odoms
Respondent: Oregon State Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
Case Number: 6:2017cv00775
Filed: May 17, 2017
Court: US District Court for the District of Oregon
Office: Eugene (6) Office
Presiding Judge: John V. Acosta
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
March 24, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 49 ORDER: Adopting Findings and Recommendation 45 . Signed on 3/24/2021 by Judge Ann L. Aiken. (ck)
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: Odoms v. Oregon State Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Donald Odoms
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: Oregon State Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
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?