US District Court for the District of Vermont Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 111 - 120 of 170
Humphrey v. Hofmann
as 1:2008cv00101
Petitioner:
Todd S. Humphrey
Respondent:
Robert Hofmann
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Scione v. State of Vermont
as 2:2008cv00008
Petitioner:
Joseph J. Scione, Jr.
Defendant:
State of Vermont
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Scione v. State of Vermont
as 1:2008cv00008
Petitioner:
Joseph J. Scione, Jr.
Defendant:
State of Vermont
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Barney v. Hofmann
as 1:2007cv00242
Petitioner:
Nelson Barney
Defendant:
Robert Hofmann
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Malico v. Vale et al
as 2:2007cv00236
Plaintiff:
George J. Malico
Defendant:
Robert Vale, Christin L. Semprebon, Karen R. Carroll and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Becker v. Hudson et al
as 2:2007cv00224
Petitioner:
Jan F. Becker
Respondent:
Hudson, Patrick J. Leahy, G. W. Bush and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ward v. Hofmann
as 1:2007cv00217
Petitioner:
David Ward
Respondent:
Robert Hofmann
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Van Hekle v. Hirst et al
as 2:2007cv00208
Petitioner:
Paul Van Hekle
Respondent:
Rea Hirst, Robert Wood and Vermont Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Patel v. Norris
as 1:2007cv00197
Petitioner:
Bharatkumar M. Patel
Respondent:
Robert Norris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2243 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Issuance of Writ)
Karim v. Norris
as 2:2007cv00179
Petitioner:
Musa Karim
Respondent:
Robert Norris
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2243 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Issuance of Writ)
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.
