Cases 11 - 20 of 191
Ramos-Ramos v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 3:2022cv01359
Petitioner:
Pedro J. Ramos-Ramos
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, Michael Carvajal and Warden Serrano
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv01312
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Coram Nobis
Ortiz-Perez v. Gonzalez-Ramos
as 3:2022cv01277
Plaintiff:
Geovanny Ortiz-Perez
Defendant:
Edwin Gonzalez-Ramos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ramos-Ramos v. USA
as 3:2022cv01257
Petitioner:
Luis G. Ramos-Ramos
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Camacho-Ramos v. Albelo-Cartagena, et al
as 22-1371
Petitioner / Appellant:
JOSE L. CAMACHO-RAMOS
Respondent / Appellee:
CLOVIS ALBELO-CARTAGENA, Warden, Las Cucharas Correctional Complex and COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO
Romero-Figueroa v. Gonzalez-Ramos et al
as 3:2022cv01131
Petitioner:
Celso Romero-Figueroa
Respondent:
Edwin O. Gonzalez-Ramos and Domingo Emanuelli-Hernandez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cruz-Ramos v. USA
as 3:2021cv01439
Petitioner:
Ismael E. Cruz-Ramos
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Herrera v. Cruz-Ramos
as 3:2021cv01319
Plaintiff:
Maximo Herrera
Defendant:
Joshua Cruz-Ramos
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brown v. Department of Correction et al
as 1:2021cv11117
Plaintiff:
Rashard Brown
Defendant:
Department of Correction, Thomas A Turco, III, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ramos-Cruz v. Carrau-Martinez et al
as 3:2020cv01589
Petitioner:
Antonio Ramos-Cruz
Respondent:
Eduardo J. Rivera-Juanatey, Ines Carrau-Martinez and Lorraine Martinez-Adorno
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
