Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Wise v. Holt
as 1:2017cv02852
Petitioner:
D'Vine Amaru Wise
Respondent:
Ahmed Holt
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Michael Vines v. Secretary, Florida Department, et al
as 16-15749
Petitioner - Appellant:
MICHAEL ANTHONY VINES
Respondent - Appellee:
SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL
Montford v. Jackson et al
as 1:2015cv01220
Plaintiff:
Rozious Montford
Defendant:
Theodore Jackson, Renee Vines and Mark Adger
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
VINES v. CREWS
as 3:2014cv00191
Petitioner:
KAULMAN REESE VINES
Respondent:
MICHAEL D CREWS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
VINING v. SECRETARY FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 1:2013cv00246
Petitioner:
JOHN VINING
Defendant:
SECRETARY FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Vines v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2013cv00913
Petitioner:
Michael Anthony Vines
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Florida Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Spillers v. White et al
as 3:2010cv02013
Petitioner:
Sally Vines Spillers
Respondent:
Cynthia White and Attorney General of the State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
v. Vining et al
as 6:2007cv01218
Defendant:
John B. Vining and United States Parole Commission
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Vining v. Nazarchuk et al
as 6:2007cv00972
Petitioner:
John B. Vining
Respondent:
Dan Nazarchuk, K. Dawn Nazarchuk, Secretary Department of Corrections and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Vining v. Hooks et al
as 2:2007cv00169
Petitioner:
Marvin Ray Vining
Respondent:
Ralph Hooks and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
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.
