Cases 31 - 40 of 419,066
Turner v. Warden
as 1:2024cv00249
Plaintiff:
Edmund Turner
Defendant:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Graves v. State of North Carolina
as 1:2024cv00502
Petitioner:
LANCE SAMUEL GRAVES
Respondent:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Russini v. Virginia DOC
as 7:2024cv00388
Petitioner:
Jennifer M. Russini
Respondent:
Virginia DOC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sueing #107626 v. Thornell et al
as 2:2024cv01447
Petitioner:
James Lee Sueing
Respondent:
Ryan Thornell and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Wardlow v. Garrett
as 2:2024cv00117
Plaintiff:
Tony Eugene Wardlow
Defendant:
Chad Garrett
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Michael S. Owlfeather-Gorbey v. District of Columbia et al
as 2:2024cv05091
Petitioner:
Michael S. Owlfeather-Gorbey
Respondent:
District of Columbia, U.S. Attorney General and Federal Bureau Of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
MALONE v. DIXON
as 1:2024cv00097
Petitioner:
TIMOTHY GENE MALONE
Respondent:
RICKY DIXON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
LE BOSS v. DIXON
as 1:2024cv00098
Petitioner:
RYAN TODD LE BOSS
Respondent:
RICKY D DIXON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bodie, Jason v. State of Florida
as 1:2024cv22332
Plaintiff:
Jason J. Bodie
Defendant:
State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bolden v. Jester
as 4:2024cv00153
Petitioner:
Brandon Keith Bolden
Respondent:
T. Jester
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.
