US District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 51 - 60 of 2,778
Mchugh v. Quick
as 5:2023cv00949
Petitioner:
Timothy Mchugh
Respondent:
Christe Quick
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ahmadpoor v. Buss
as 5:2023cv00932
Petitioner:
Ardavan Ahmadpoor
Respondent:
David Buss
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Tibbetts v. Rogers
as 5:2023cv00913
Petitioner:
Kenneth H Tibbetts
Respondent:
David Rogers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Spalding v. Administrative Offfices of the US Courts et al
as 5:2023cv00905
Petitioner:
David L Spalding
Respondent:
Administrative Offfices of the US Courts and Federal Public Defenders Office
Defendant:
Administration Office of the US Courts and Warden FNU Goldey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Deluna v. Harpe
as 5:2023cv00890
Petitioner:
Luke E Deluna
Respondent:
Steven Harpe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ford v. Buss
as 5:2023cv00856
Petitioner:
Marcus D Ford
Respondent:
David Buss
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Grayson v. Bridges
as 5:2023cv00857
Petitioner:
Anthony Grayson
Respondent:
Carrie Bridges
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lay v. Quick
as 5:2023cv00858
Plaintiff:
Wade Lay
Defendant:
Christie Quick
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Fiorito v. LNU
as 5:2023cv00834
Petitioner:
Michael Fiorito
Respondent:
FNU LNU
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Mayes v. State of Oklahoma
as 5:2023cv00822
Petitioner:
Lawrence L Mayes
Respondent:
Oklahoma State of
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.
