Cases 1 - 10 of 304
Nash v. F C I - Talladega
as 1:2024cv00391
Plaintiff:
Paul Nash, Jr
Defendant:
Warden F C I - Talladega
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Pitts v. Dixon (Sarasota County)
as 8:2023cv02805
Petitioner:
Stephen F. Pitts
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Parks v. Smith et al
as 1:2023cv23138
Plaintiff:
Edward F. Parks
Defendant:
Mathew Smith, Mohave County Arizona and Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
GOW v. PISTRO
as 5:2023cv00146
Petitioner:
KAY F GOW
Respondent:
KEVIN D PISTRO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Mills v. Gillis
as 2:2023cv00093
Petitioner:
Robert F. Mills
Respondent:
Warden Sean Gillis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Stoldt v. Secretary, Department of Corrections
as 6:2023cv00345
Petitioner:
Angela F. Stoldt
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mata v. Warden, FCC Coleman - Low
as 5:2022cv00524
Petitioner:
Juan F. Mata
Respondent:
Warden, FCC Coleman - Low
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Masiello v. Florida Department of Corrections
as 9:2022cv81299
Plaintiff:
Louis F. Masiello
Defendant:
Florida Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HUG v. STATE OF GEORGIA
as 1:2022cv03091
Petitioner:
DONALD F HUG, II
Respondent:
State of Georgia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HUG v. STATE OF GEORGIA
as 5:2022cv00286
Petitioner:
DONALD F HUG, II
Respondent:
STATE OF GEORGIA
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.
