Cases 81 - 90 of 1,437
Wilson v. Warden Sharp
as 9:2022cv01248
Petitioner:
John Ervin Wilson, Jr, John Wilson and John E. Wilson
Respondent:
Warden Sharp
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
George Davis, III v. John Woodson
as 22-6543
Petitioner / Appellant:
GEORGE W. DAVIS, III
Respondent / Appellee:
JOHN A. WOODSON, Warden
Hill v. FCI McDowell Warden
as 1:2022cv00180
Petitioner:
John Farelin Hill
Respondent:
FCI McDowell Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Cureton v. Warden, McCormick Correctional Institution
as 0:2022cv01179
Petitioner:
John Mark Cureton, III
Respondent:
South Carolina, State of and Warden, McCormick Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Whitcher v. Stein et al
as 5:2022hc02084
Petitioner:
Aulden Mathew Whitcher
Respondent:
Josh Stein, Jon David, John Ingram and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Garvin v. Cohen
as 2:2022cv00994
Petitioner:
John Garvin
Respondent:
Warden LeVern Cohen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kalu v. Dunbar
as 5:2022cv01184
Petitioner:
John Oscar Kalu
Respondent:
Warden R S Dunbar
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Hill v. FCI McDowell Warden
as 1:2022cv00176
Petitioner:
John Farelin Hill
Respondent:
FCI McDowell Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Spaulding v. Streeval
as 7:2022cv00118
Petitioner:
John Martin Spaulding
Respondent:
J.C. Streeval
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Epps v. Gilley
as 3:2022cv00061
Petitioner:
Robert Junior Epps
Respondent:
John Gilley
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.
