Cases 1 - 10 of 180
Rogers v. Warden
as 3:2024cv00072
Petitioner:
Tiger A Rogers and Tiger Rogers
Respondent:
Warden
Not Yet Classified:
INDIANA STATE PRISON E-FILE (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PRINGLE v. WARDEN
as 2:2023cv00450
Petitioner:
ROGER PRINGLE
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PRINGLE v. WARDEN
as 2:2023cv00335
Petitioner:
ROGER PRINGLE
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PRINGLE v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 2:2023cv00321
Petitioner:
ROGER PRINGLE
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PRINGLE v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 2:2023cv00146
Petitioner:
ROGER PRINGLE
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 hb Removal - Petition for Habeas Corpus
Roger Day, Jr. v. T. Watson
as 23-1072
Petitioner / Appellant:
ROGER C. DAY, JR.
Respondent / Appellee:
T. J. WATSON, Warden
Vidal v. State of Wisconsin et al
as 2:2022cv01378
Petitioner:
Dennis Vidal
Respondent:
State of Wisconsin, Child Protection Services, Brenda Lee Barthoimew and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Hettinger, Roger v. Keyes, R.D.
as 3:2022cv00536
Petitioner:
Roger Hettinger
Respondent:
Warden R.D. Keyes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Rogers v. Adkins
as 2:2022cv02163
Petitioner:
Brayant Rogers
Respondent:
Felicia Adkins
Not Classified By Court:
Habeas Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Vidal v. State of Wisconsin et al
as 2:2022cv00872
Petitioner:
Dennis Vidal
Respondent:
State of Wisconsin, Child Protection Services, Brenda Lee Barthoimew and others
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.
