Jones v. Stephens Director TDCJ-CID
Petitioner: Carl David Jones
Respondent: William Stephens Director TDCJ-CID
Case Number: 3:2014cv00344
Filed: January 28, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Office: Dallas Office
County: Dallas
Presiding Judge: Irma Carrillo Ramirez
Presiding Judge: Jorge A Solis
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
May 4, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 32 ORDER ACCEPTING 30 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE: The 3 petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED. The petitioner is DENIED a Certificate of Appealability. (Ordered by Chief Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 5/4/2016) (sss)
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: Jones v. Stephens 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: Carl David Jones
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: William Stephens 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?