Williams v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Petitioner: Sylvester Eugene Williams
Respondent: Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Case Number: 2:2017cv00109
Filed: June 15, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Office: Amarillo Office
County: Potter
Presiding Judge: Clinton E. Averitte
Presiding Judge: Mary Lou Robinson
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
August 11, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS re: 20 Findings and Recommendation re: 3 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Sylvester Eugene Williams. (Ordered by Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk on 8/11/2020) (daa)
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 Texas Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Williams v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Sylvester Eugene Williams
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: Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
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?