Cases 71 - 80 of 396
Williams v. Stone
as 3:2022cv00100
Petitioner:
Vanston Venner Williams
Respondent:
Stacey N. Stone
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Ogbebor v. Stone
as 3:2022cv00101
Petitioner:
Owen Ogbebor
Respondent:
Warden Stacey N. Stone
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Florez-Oquendo v. Stone
as 3:2022cv00096
Petitioner:
Alirio De Jesus Florez-Oquendo
Respondent:
Warden Stacey N. Stone
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Stone et al v. Kemp et al
as 1:2022cv03389
Petitioner:
Alfred Lee Stone, Hattie Byrd, Eddie Byrd and others
Respondent:
Brian Kemp, Jimmy S. Smith and Georgia Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Lozada-Pua v. Stone
as 3:2022cv00092
Petitioner:
Jhon Harrys Lozada-Pua
Respondent:
Stacey N. Stone
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Oyelade v. Stone
as 3:2022cv00091
Petitioner:
Taofeeq Olamilek Oyelade
Respondent:
Warden Stacey N. Stone
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Arroyave-Ramirez v. Stone
as 3:2022cv00093
Petitioner:
Hector Hugo Arroyave-Ramirez
Respondent:
Stacey N. Stone
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Peacock v. Stone et al
as 2:2022cv01029
Plaintiff:
Kelvin Demetrius Peacock
Defendant:
Matthew R Stone, Calloway and Hudson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Candelo v. Stone
as 3:2022cv00086
Petitioner:
Francisco Arturo Cortes-Candelo
Respondent:
Warden Stacey N. Stone
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Caicedo v. Stone
as 3:2022cv00085
Petitioner:
Alfredo Caicedo
Respondent:
Stacey N. Stone
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
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.
