Connecticut Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 111 - 120 of 1,409
Alicea v. USA et al
as 3:2023cv00170
Petitioner:
Maria Mercedes Alicea
Respondent:
United States Of America, State of Connecticut, Jane Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Saleem v. Pullen
as 3:2023cv00147
Petitioner:
Muhammad Saleem
Respondent:
T. Pullen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Green v. Caron
as 3:2023cv00094
Petitioner:
Courtney Green
Respondent:
Caron
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Boehm v. Pullen
as 3:2023cv00036
Petitioner:
Brian Boehm
Respondent:
T. Pullen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Zarzar v. Pullen
as 3:2023cv00028
Petitioner:
Shmuel Zarzar
Respondent:
Pullen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Pittman v. Pullen
as 3:2022cv01651
Petitioner:
Marlo Pittman
Respondent:
T. Pullen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Orndorff v. Pullen
as 3:2022cv01637
Petitioner:
Danielle Nicole Orndorff
Respondent:
Pullen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Raynor v. Pullen
as 3:2022cv01609
Petitioner:
Alicia Raynor and Alicia Nicole Raynor
Defendant:
Pullen
Respondent:
Timethea Pullen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Schlosser v. Lamont et al
as 3:2022cv01620
Petitioner:
Jeffrey Schlosser
Defendant:
William Tong
Respondent:
Ned Lamont
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Freeman v. Pullen et al
as 3:2022cv01567
Petitioner:
Carolyn Freeman
Respondent:
Timethea Pullen, Patrick McFarland, Colette Peters and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
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.
