US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 143
PEW v. KLEMM
as 2:2024cv00982
Plaintiff:
ALFONSO PERCY PEW
Defendant:
ULLI KLEMM
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PEW v. HOSTERMON et al
as 2:2024cv00983
Plaintiff:
ALFONSO PERCY PEW
Defendant:
RAY HOSTERMON, PHILIP MATTIS, CHRISTOPHER MYERS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
RANDY HAAG v. TERRA
as 5:2024cv00853
Petitioner:
RANDY HAAG
Respondent:
JOSEPH TERRA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 dp Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (DEATH PENALTY)
DOE TEST v. SCI PHOENIX et al
as 2:2023cv99991
Petitioner:
JANE DOE TEST
Respondent:
SCI PHOENIX and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF PA TEST
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 dp Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (DEATH PENALTY)
FLOR v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2022cv02765
Petitioner:
ROBERT ANTHONY FLOR
Respondent:
JOHN E. WETZEL, JEFFREY A. MARTIN and MARIROSA LAMAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WHITFIELD v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2021cv03484
Plaintiff:
AMER WILLIAM WHITFIELD
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, P.P.S SYSTEM PRISON'S, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SAMUELS VS SUPERINTENDENT, SCI FAYETTE ET AL
as 2:2021cv03417
Petitioner:
MALIK SAMUELS
Respondent:
SCI FAYETTE SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF PHILADELPHIA and PENNSYLVANIA ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
THOMAS v. WETZEL et al
as 5:2020cv01371
Respondent:
JOHN E. WETZEL, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF LANCASTER and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Petitioner:
LEETON JAHWANZA THOMAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 dp
LE v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2019cv05869
Respondent:
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, ROBERT GILMORE, JOHN E. WETZEL and others
Petitioner:
TAM M. LE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 dp
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.
