Georgia Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 21 - 30 of 11,651
Phillips v. Forth
as 3:2024cv00130
Respondent:
Dan Forth
Petitioner:
Kenneth Phillips
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ALLEN v. MONTERREY, et al.
as 5:2024cv00225
Defendant:
OFFICER MARSHALL, OFFICER WILKES, OFFICER MONTERREY and others
Plaintiff:
DENVER ALLEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kearney v. Maddox
as 1:2024cv03051
Respondent:
Melody Maddox
Plaintiff:
Marieo Terrell Kearney
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Manney v. Owens
as 1:2024cv03033
Petitioner:
Henry M. Manney
Respondent:
Sheriff Craig Owens
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Freeman v. Danforth
as 1:2024cv03028
Respondent:
William Danforth
Petitioner:
Christopher T. Freeman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ROBINSON v. ODUM
as 3:2024cv00067
Respondent:
WARDEN ROY ODUM
Petitioner:
ALLEN ROBINSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Horton v. Jones
as 6:2024cv00036
Petitioner:
Quentin Horton
Respondent:
Joshua Jones
Participant:
Attorney General State of Georgia (Notice Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BENNEFIELD v. ODOM
as 5:2024cv00216
Petitioner:
FERNANDO BENNEFIELD
Respondent:
ROY ODOM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
JONES v. ODOM
as 1:2024cv00099
Petitioner:
EMORY T. JONES
Respondent:
WARDEN ROY ODUM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Coote v. Warden, Folkston ICE Processing Center
as 5:2024cv00050
Petitioner:
Shevon Coote
Respondent:
Warden, Folkston ICE Processing Center
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
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.
