Leachman v. Thaler
Petitioner: Matthew James Leachman
Respondent: Director TDCJ-CID
Case Number: 4:2011cv00212
Filed: January 13, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Office: Houston Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Kenneth M. Hoyt
Nature of Suit: 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
September 30, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 53 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus as to Leachman's second claim for relief. This order is STAYED pending the conclusion of all appeals or the expiration of time to pursue any such appeal. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt) Parties notified. (cfelchak, 4)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Leachman v. Thaler
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Matthew James Leachman
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: 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?