North Carolina Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 30,447
Pacheco v. Love et al
as 5:2024ct03125
Plaintiff:
Elijah E. Pacheco
Defendant:
Skyler Love, Deputy Greene, Graylan Groce and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act
Woodard v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 5:2024ct03126
Plaintiff:
Lawrence Woodard
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, Warden L.B. Kelly, Safety Supervisor Muscle and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Medina v. USA
as 1:2024cv00148
Petitioner:
Samuel Zuniga Medina
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Haynes v. Quinn et al
as 5:2024cv00125
Defendant:
FNU Starowicz, FNU Quinn, FNU Lay and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Jeremy Haynes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hines v. USA
as 3:2024cv00482
Petitioner:
Warren Eugene Hines, Jr.
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
CLOSNER v. USA
as 1:2024cv00411
Petitioner:
TERRY JAMES CLOSNER
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Williams v. Unnamed Defendant
as 5:2024ct03124
Plaintiff:
Jasper Williams
Defendant:
Unnamed Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dawkins v. Thompson et al
as 5:2024ct03123
Plaintiff:
Darnell Lamar Dawkins
Defendant:
Captain Tanesha Thompson, Captain Powell Wendell, Sergeant Dunia and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williams v. Bureau of Prisons
as 5:2024hc02096
Petitioner:
Daryl Williams
Respondent:
Bureau of Prisons, JESSICA SAGE and BOP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Macon v. Morton et al
as 5:2024ct03116
Plaintiff:
Cory Montae Macon
Defendant:
Warden Morton, Michael Russell, State of North Carolina and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
