Indiana Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 51 - 60 of 11,849
Scruggs v. Westville Correctional Facility
as 1:2024cv00113
Petitioner:
Christopher L Scruggs
Respondent:
Westville Correctional Facility
Not Yet Classified:
WESTVILLE E-FILE(Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Martin v. Warden
as 2:2024cv00092
Petitioner:
Rhett A Martin
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Scruggs v. Westville Correctional Facility
as 3:2024cv00229
Petitioner:
Christopher L Scruggs
Respondent:
Warden
Not Yet Classified:
WESTVILLE E-FILE(Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Roberts v. Warden
as 3:2024cv00208
Petitioner:
Ronell L Roberts
Respondent:
Warden
Not Yet Classified:
INDIANA STATE PRISON E-FILE (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Carter v. Warden
as 3:2024cv00212
Petitioner:
Michael D. Carter, Jr.
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sowder v. Sheriff
as 3:2024cv00227
Petitioner:
Robert Sowder
Respondent:
Sheriff
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Carter v. Warden
as 1:2024cv00105
Petitioner:
Michael D. Carter, Jr.
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sowder v. Sheriff
as 1:2024cv00106
Petitioner:
Robert Sowder
Respondent:
Sheriff
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
TONEY v. WARDEN
as 2:2024cv00080
Petitioner:
ANGUS J. TONEY
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. Warden
as 3:2024cv00199
Petitioner:
Brandon Lee Johnson and Brandon Johnson
Respondent:
Warden
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.
