U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 307
Graham v. United States of America, The
as 1:2025cv00050
Petitioner:
Jonathan S. Graham
Respondent:
United States of America, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Norman v. State of North Dakota
as 1:2025cv00035
Petitioner:
Devin J. Norman
Respondent:
State of North Dakota
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Davis v. United States of America
as 1:2025cv00026
Petitioner:
Eric Davis
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Morgan v. United States of America
as 1:2025cv00022
Petitioner:
David Brian Morgan
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Peltier v. Joyce
as 1:2025cv00018
Petitioner:
Dalton Peltier
Respondent:
Joseph Joyce
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Morgan v. United States
as 1:2025cv00013
Petitioner:
David Brian Morgan
Respondent:
United States
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Moore v. United States
as 1:2025cv00014
Petitioner:
Cheyenne Moore
Respondent:
United States
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Ishmael v. United States
as 1:2025cv00006
Petitioner:
Jon Ishmael
Respondent:
United States
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Chase v. Joyce
as 1:2025cv00003
Petitioner:
Lorry Van Chase
Respondent:
Joseph Joyce
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Biden
as 1:2024cv00258
Defendant:
President Joe Biden
Petitioner:
Cecil Jones
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.
