Cases 71 - 80 of 39,754
Bankhead v. Bureau of Prisons
as 1:2024cv02387
Petitioner:
Diandra Bankhead
Respondent:
Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SMITH v. USA
as 1:2024cv00077
Petitioner:
CHASMON DEON SMITH
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
HODGES v. COLQUITT COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
as 1:2024cv00076
Petitioner:
EDWARD HODGES
Respondent:
COLQUITT COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
QUINN v. JOHNSON STATE PRISON
as 5:2024cv00163
Petitioner:
RANDALL TULLY QUINN
Respondent:
JOHNSON STATE PRISON
Other:
ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF GEORGIA (NOTICE)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HILLMAN v. SELF et al
as 5:2024cv00169
Petitioner:
MARVIN HILLMAN, III
Respondent:
JUDGE TILLMAN E. SELF, JUDGE CONNIE LYNN WILLIFORD, DISTRICT ATTORNEY CLIFFORD T WOODY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv00078
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
TABB v. WASHINGTON
as 5:2024cv00166
Plaintiff:
JEFFERY TABB
Defendant:
DEPUTY WARDEN WASHINGTON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WATSON v. DOE et al
as 5:2024cv00171
Plaintiff:
TYRONE WATSON
Defendant:
JOHN DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Stevens v. Jones
as 1:2024cv02360
Petitioner:
Yakenski Stevens
Respondent:
Joshua Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00100
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 pr Complaint for mandamus relief (prisoner)
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.
