US District Court for the District of Idaho Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 91 - 100 of 1,038
Hoffman v. Rule
as 1:2022cv00278
Petitioner:
Monte G Hoffman
Respondent:
Warden Rule
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
McCoy v. Tewalt
as 1:2022cv00267
Petitioner:
Matthew McCoy
Respondent:
Josh Tewalt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Shunn v. Davis, et al.
as 1:2022cv00258
Plaintiff:
Forrest Glenn Shunn
Defendant:
Davis and Wesseler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Crutcher v. State of Idaho, et al.
as 1:2022cv00223
Petitioner:
Gwenda Lynn Crutcher
Respondent:
State of Idaho and Warden Woodland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hassan v. State of Idaho et al
as 1:2022cv00219
Petitioner:
Mohammed Hassan
Respondent:
State of Idaho and Warden John Doe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Crutcher v. State of Idaho, et al.
as 1:2022cv00214
Petitioner:
Gwenda Lynn Crutcher
Respondent:
State of Idaho and Warden Woodland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Reynolds v. United States of America
as 1:2022cv00168
Petitioner:
Michael Curtis Reynolds
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Burress v. Rutland et al
as 1:2022cv00159
Petitioner:
Gabriel Burress
Respondent:
Rutland, Two Unidentified Idaho State Troopers and Carlos Rodriguez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Marlow v. State of Idaho
as 1:2022cv00158
Plaintiff:
Brandon Cody Marlow
Defendant:
State of Idaho
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rodgers v. Valley
as 1:2022cv00153
Plaintiff:
Daniel Edward Rodgers
Defendant:
Randy Valley
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.