Arkansas Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 21 - 30 of 22,484
Harmon v. Payne
as 4:2024cv00718
Defendant:
Dexter Payne
Plaintiff:
Rodney Dale Harmon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mullins v. Scott et al
as 4:2024cv00716
Defendant:
Jerry Mantis, Gean Sieger, Leroy Martin and others
Plaintiff:
Sharda L Mullins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ackerson v. Garrett et al
as 2:2024cv00157
Defendant:
C Hansen, C Nichols and C Garrett
Plaintiff:
Bradyn Ackerson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wardlow v. Tomar
as 2:2024cv00158
Plaintiff:
Tony Eugene Wardlow
Defendant:
Maharaj Alexandro Tomar
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mullins v. Sieger et al
as 4:2024cv00715
Defendant:
Gean Sieger, Jerry Maness and Leroy Martin
Plaintiff:
Sharda L Mullins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Spencer v. Payne et al
as 4:2024cv00717
Defendant:
Moses Jackson, Aundrea Culclager, Michael Richardson and others
Plaintiff:
Cornelius Spencer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mullins v. Scott et al
as 1:2024cv01054
Plaintiff:
Sharda L Mullins
Defendant:
Jerry Mantis, Jailer Scott, Leroy Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sisk v. Wellpath et al
as 6:2024cv06115
Plaintiff:
Braylon A. Sisk
Defendant:
John or Jane Doe and Wellpath
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mullins v. Sieger et al
as 1:2024cv01055
Defendant:
Leroy Martin, Jerry Maness and Gean Sieger
Plaintiff:
Sharda L Mullins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Preston v. Chesshir et al
as 6:2024cv06114
Respondent:
Jail Administrator Sarah Haney, Jana Bradford, Bryon Chesshir and others
Petitioner:
Derenzo Deshon Preston
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.
