District of Pennsylvania Prisoner Petitions Cases
General Cases, Dockets and Filings
Cases filed
Cases 1 - 10 of 3,189
WILLIAMS v. COMMONWEALTH OF PA et al
as 1:2016cv00232
Petitioner:
ROSHA CHARLES WILLIAMS
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PA, MICHAEL CLARK, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
GONEY v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2016cv01450
Petitioner:
ALVIN GONEY
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
WINGFIELD v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2016cv01451
Petitioner:
RONALD WINGFIELD
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
NEAL v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2016cv01449
Petitioner:
FREDERICK NEAL
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
KEMP v. SUPERINTENDENT, S.C.I. MERCER
as 2:2016cv01439
Petitioner:
ALONZO KEMP
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT, S.C.I. MERCER
Cause Of Action: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
LEPRE v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2016cv01441
Petitioner:
GERALD S. LEPRE, JR.
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PENDLETON v. WINGARD et al
as 2:2016cv01410
Petitioner:
RAYMOND PENDLETON
Respondent:
TREVOR A. WINGARD, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PATTON v. LINK et al
as 2:2016cv01413
Petitioner:
NEAL L. PATTON
Respondent:
CYNTHIA LINK, STEPHAN A. ZAPPALA, JR., THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ROSARIO v. KUTA
as 3:2016cv00201
Petitioner:
REYNALDO ROSARIO
Respondent:
S. M. KUTA
Cause Of Action: 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.