US District Court for the Southern District of California Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 141 - 150 of 4,084
Vlasich v. Madden
as 3:2022cv00991
Petitioner:
Steven Vlasich
Respondent:
Madden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Foster v. Unknown
as 3:2022cv00983
Petitioner:
Carlos Randolph Foster
Respondent:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Scott v. Bonta
as 3:2022cv00976
Petitioner:
Ramon Anwar Scott
Respondent:
Rob Bonta
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Davis v. Madden
as 3:2022cv00951
Petitioner:
Kelly Beau Davis
Respondent:
Raymond Madden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Price v. Montgomery et al
as 3:2022cv00912
Petitioner:
Marcel D. Price
Respondent:
Warren L. Montgomery and Merrick Garland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lopez v. Hill et al
as 3:2022cv00888
Petitioner:
Henry Elvis Lopez
Respondent:
James Hill and Rob Bonta
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dunbar v. Campos
as 3:2022cv00875
Petitioner:
Michael Ladre Dunbar
Respondent:
Raul Campos, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Douglas v. Hill et al
as 3:2022cv00884
Petitioner:
Patrick C. Douglas
Respondent:
Rick Hill and Rob Bonta
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Garrett v. Moore et al
as 3:2022cv00864
Petitioner:
Charles Devon Garrett
Respondent:
Shawn Moore and The Attorney General of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jackson v. Matteson et al
as 3:2022cv00863
Petitioner:
Joseph Jackson
Respondent:
G. Matteson and Attorney General of the State of California
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.
