Parker v. Booker

Petitioner: Chantz Parker
Respondent: Bernard Booker
Case Number: 7:2019cv00568
Filed: August 16, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Virginia
Presiding Judge: Robert S Ballou
Referring Judge: Michael F Urbanski
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28:2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 16, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 16, 2019 PAID-Filing Fee Received $ 5.00, receipt number 0423-3207389 (slt)
August 16, 2019 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 USC 2254, filed by Chantz Parker. (Attachments: #1 Supplement Memorandum of Law in Support, #2 Exhibit Trial Transcript, #3 Exhibit Trial Transcript, #4 Exhibit Trial Transcript, #5 Exhibit Trial Transcript)(slt)

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 Virginia Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Parker v. Booker
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Bernard Booker
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Chantz Parker
Represented By: David Leroy Parker
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 [ 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?