Cases 41 - 50 of 9,171
Christopherson v. Clarke
as 3:2024cv00351
Petitioner:
Mark Todd Christopherson
Respondent:
Harold Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brown-El v. Unknown
as 2:2024cv00318
Petitioner:
Tina Brown-El
Respondent:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ramsey v. Commonwealth of Virginia
as 2:2024cv00311
Petitioner:
Charles C. Ramsey
Respondent:
Commonwealth of Virginia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Nealy v. Warden of MCTC et al
as 2:2024cv00291
Petitioner:
Michael Nealy
Respondent:
Warden of MCTC and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pittman v. Schaefer
as 7:2024cv00313
Petitioner:
Malcom Rashad Pittman
Respondent:
George E. Schaefer
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Marciano v. Dotson
as 2:2024cv00304
Petitioner:
Michael Marciano
Respondent:
Chadwick Dotson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mason v. Militana et al
as 2:2024cv00300
Plaintiff:
Anthony N. Mason
Defendant:
Dr. Mark Militana, C. Riner, C. Taylor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Drayton v. Unknown
as 1:2024cv00795
Petitioner:
Michael Drayton
Respondent:
Unknown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brock v. Commonwealth of Virginia et al
as 2:2024cv00297
Petitioner:
Andrew Brock, Jr.
Respondent:
Commonwealth of Virginia and Circuit Court of the City of Suffolk
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brock v. Commonwealth of Virginia
as 2:2024cv00298
Petitioner:
Andrew Brock, Jr.
Respondent:
Commonwealth of Virginia
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.
