Cases 1 - 10 of 110
Benitez v. Warden Edgefield
as 6:2023cv02751
Petitioner:
Rene Benitez
Respondent:
United States Parole Commission and Warden Edgefield Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Woods v. United States Parole Commission
as 5:2022cv00294
Petitioner:
Willie Perry Woods
Respondent:
United States Parole Commission
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Williams v. Entzel, Jr.
as 2:2019cv00144
Respondent:
United States Parole Commission
Petitioner:
Orlando Pierre Williams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Bing-Gong v. United States Parole Commission
as 6:2018cv03465
Petitioner:
Yong Bing-Gong
Respondent:
United States Parole Commission and Warden of FCI-Edgefield
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Hewlett v. United States Parole Commission
as 1:2018cv01243
Petitioner:
William Hewlett
Respondent:
United States Parole Commission
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
WATSON v. UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION
as 3:2018cv00090
Petitioner:
Curtis Lee Watson
Respondent:
United States Parole Commission
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Warren v. Bolster et al
as 1:2018cv00601
Petitioner:
Morris J Warren
Respondent:
Mark Bolster, J. Ray Ormond and United States Parole Commission
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
HUGHES v. BOLSTER et al
as 2:2018cv00159
Petitioner:
JOHN HUGHES, III
Respondent:
J. Ray Ormond and United States Parole Commission
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
WILLIAMS v. BUREAU OF PRISONS et al
as 2:2018cv00008
Petitioner:
JAMES C. WILLIAMS
Respondent:
United States Parole Commission and Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Eugene Cunningham v. US Parole Commission
as 17-6702
Petitioner - Appellant:
EUGENE JEROME CUNNINGHAM, a/k/a Eugene J. Cunningham
Respondent - Appellee:
UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION and WARDEN FCI BENNETTSVILLE
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.
