Alabama Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 31 - 40 of 22,840
McNeal v. McClain et al
as 5:2024cv00472
Petitioner:
Jonathan Marcel McNeal
Respondent:
Antonio McClain and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brocato v. Hamm
as 7:2024cv00489
Plaintiff:
Ryan Anthony Brocato
Defendant:
Hamm
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ford v. United States of America
as 2:2024cv08012
Petitioner:
DeAnte Marquise Ford
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Guy v. Burch
as 1:2024cv00115
Petitioner:
Vernon Guy
Respondent:
Paul Burch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. Neely
as 7:2024cv00471
Petitioner:
Angela Johnson
Respondent:
Kimberly Neely
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Paw v. Neely et al
as 7:2024cv00470
Petitioner:
April Paw
Respondent:
Warden K Neely and C Peters
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Harrison v. Peters et al
as 1:2024cv00113
Petitioner:
Winston L. Harrison
Respondent:
Kenneth Peters and Lanetta Banks
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hill v. Taylor et al (INMATE 1)
as 3:2024cv00224
Plaintiff:
Nathaniel Lamar Hill
Defendant:
Heath Taylor and Steve Johnson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Walker v. United States of America
as 7:2024cv00449
Petitioner:
LeKeith Antwon Walker
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Watson v. Givens et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2024cv00223
Plaintiff:
Julian Brett Watson
Defendant:
Adrienne Givens and State of Alabama
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.
