Pitchford v. Jackson

Petitioner: Javon D. Pitchford
Respondent: Eric Jackson
Case Number: 2:2018cv00347
Filed: March 7, 2018
Court: Washington Western District Court
Office: Seattle Office
County: Snohomish
Presiding Judge: Richard A Jones
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28:2254
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 8, 2018 4 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 3 Report and Recommendations, by Judge Richard A. Jones. The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation; Petitioners federal habeas petition (Dkt. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1); Petitioner is DENIED issuance of a certificate of appealability.**1 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Javon Pitchford, Prisoner ID: 302998)(SG)

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

Search for this case: Pitchford v. Jackson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Javon D. Pitchford
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 ]
Respondent: Eric Jackson
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?