Fourth Circuit Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 61 - 70 of 202
Anthony Juniper v. Keith Davi
as 13-7
Petitioner - Appellant:
ANTHONY BERNARD JUNIPER
Respondent - Appellee:
EDDIE L. PEARSON, Warden, Sussex I State Prison
Respondent:
LORETTA K. KELLY
Morva v. Davis
as 7:2013cv00283
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Sigmon v. Byars
as 8:2013cv01399
Petitioner:
Brad Keith Sigmon
Respondent:
William R Byars, Jr and Joseph McFadden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Jason Hurst v. Kenneth Lassiter
as 13-6
Petitioner - Appellant:
JASON WAYNE HURST
Respondent - Appellee:
KENNETH E. LASSITER, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina
Bond v. State of North Carolina et al
as 5:2013hc02103
Petitioner:
Charles Phillips Bond
Respondent:
State of North Carolina, J.M. Freeman, Valerie M. Asbell and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
William Barnes v. Kenneth Lassiter
as 13-5
Petitioner - Appellant:
WILLIAM LEROY BARNES
Respondent - Appellee:
KENNETH E. LASSITER, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina
Elrico Fowler v. Kenneth Lassiter
as 13-4
Petitioner - Appellant:
ELRICO DARNELL FOWLER
Respondent - Appellee:
KENNETH E. LASSITER, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina
Alkebulanyahh v. Byars et al
as 6:2013cv00918
Petitioner:
Abdiyyah Ben Alkebulanyahh
Respondent:
William Byars, Jr and Wayne C McCabe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
THOMPSON v. LASSITER
as 1:2013cv00196
Petitioner:
JOHN HENRY THOMPSON
Respondent:
KENNETH E. LASSITER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Errol Moses v. Kenneth Lassiter
as 13-3
Petitioner - Appellant:
ERROL DUKE MOSES
Respondent - Appellee:
KENNETH E. LASSITER, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina
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.