Cases 41 - 50 of 88
Jermaine Carter v. Warden James T Vaughn Correcti, et al
as 16-3898
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JERMAINE L. CARTER
Defendant - Appellee:
WARDEN JAMES T VAUGHN CORRECTIONAL CENTER and ATTORNEY GENERAL DELAWARE
CARTER v. CHARLES
as 2:2016cv04848
Petitioner:
ANTHONY RAY CARTER
Respondent:
CHARLES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
JERRY-EL v. LUTHER
as 2:2016mc00404
Petitioner:
BERNARD CARTER JERRY-EL
Respondent:
JAMEY LUTHER and BEAVER COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Carter v. Pierce et al
as 1:2016cv00253
Petitioner:
Jermaine L. Carter
Respondent:
David Pierce and Matt Denn
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Carter v. Pierce et al
as 1:2016cv00007
Petitioner:
Jermaine L. Carter
Respondent:
David Pierce and Attorney General of the State of Delaware
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
CARTER v. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2015cv05719
Petitioner:
ANTOINE CARTER
Respondent:
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
CARTER v. MOONEY et al
as 2:2015cv04896
Petitioner:
AARON CARTER
Respondent:
VINCENT MOONEY, KATHLEEN KANE and SETH WILLIAMS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Carter v. Pierce et al
as 1:2015cv00305
Petitioner:
Jermaine L. Carter
Respondent:
David Pierce and Matt Denn
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Howard Carter v. Superintendent Fayette SCI, et al
as 15-1719
Plaintiff - Appellant:
HOWARD A. CARTER
Defendant - Appellee:
SUPERINTENDENT FAYETTE SCI and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
CARTER v. HUNTINGDON PRISON WARDEN et al
as 5:2015cv00932
Petitioner:
BOOKER LEON CARTER
Respondent:
HUNTINGDON PRISON WARDEN, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BERKS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
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.
