US District Court for the District of North Dakota Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 71 - 80 of 1,231
Wickham v. Foster et al
as 1:2023cv00057
Petitioner:
Corey Michael Wickham
Respondent:
Warden Steve Foster and Warden Shaun Fode
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lazalde v. USA
as 1:2023cv00053
Petitioner:
Alejandro Lazalde
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Lazalde v. USA
as 1:2023cv00054
Petitioner:
Alejandro Lazalde
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
McGarvey v. USA
as 1:2023cv00056
Petitioner:
Curtis James McGarvey
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Happel v. Pringle
as 3:2023cv00045
Petitioner:
Tyson Happel
Respondent:
North Dakota, State of and Chad Pringle
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Happel v. Pringle
as 3:2023cv00046
Petitioner:
Tyson Happel
Respondent:
North Dakota, State of and Chad Pringle
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sarnor v. USA
as 3:2023cv00037
Petitioner:
Zwannah Ahamadu Sarnor
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Bridges v. Director of Corrections
as 1:2023cv00035
Petitioner:
John Clark Bridges
Respondent:
Director of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hoff v. Krabbenhoft et al
as 1:2023cv00029
Plaintiff:
Kevin Hoff
Defendant:
Dave Krabbenhoft, Jordan Keller, Lacey Fisher and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brickle-Hicks v. Sayler
as 1:2023cv00017
Petitioner:
Morris Jerome Brickle-Hicks
Respondent:
James Sayler
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.
