Ohio Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 11 - 20 of 8,821
Dale v. Healy
as 4:2024cv00692
Petitioner:
Curtis Lee Dale
Respondent:
Warden I. Healy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Burton v. Frederick
as 3:2024cv00685
Petitioner:
Shasta Burton
Respondent:
Warden George Frederick
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mills v. May
as 5:2024cv00680
Petitioner:
Phil D. Mills
Respondent:
Warden Harold May
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Young v. Davis
as 1:2024cv00663
Petitioner:
Kiaran Young
Respondent:
Warden Anthony Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Larr v. Mackey
as 2:2024cv01730
Petitioner:
Michael L. Larr
Respondent:
Warden Misty Mackey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Larr v. Mackey
as 1:2024cv00656
Petitioner:
Michael L. Larr
Respondent:
Warden Misty Mackey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Miller v. Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institute
as 3:2024cv00105
Petitioner:
James C Miller
Defendant:
Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institute
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WOODLEY SR. v. YOUNG et al
as 2:2024cv01619
Petitioner:
Jamal F. Woodley Sr.
Respondent:
David C Young, John R. Cornely, Larry Thomas and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
CALHOUN v. LYNCH et al
as 2:2024cv01609
Petitioner:
RAPHAEL R. CALHOUN
Respondent:
Julie Lynch, FRANCISCO LUTTECKE, Frederick D Benton, Jr and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Lloyd v. Mackey
as 1:2024cv00622
Petitioner:
Cronie Lloyd
Respondent:
Acting Warden Misty Mackey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
