Prisoner Petitions Cases filed in the Seventh Circuit Courts
Cases 1 - 10 of 62
Jose Suarez v. Chance Jones
as 24-1908
Petitioner: JOSE SUAREZ
Respondent: CHANCE JONES, Warden
Jose Suarez v. Chance Jones
as 24-1906
Petitioner: JOSE SUAREZ
Respondent: CHANCE JONES, Warden
Amaya v. Jones et al
as 1:2024cv03828
Petitioner: Daniel Amaya
Respondent: Chance Jones, Latoya Hughes and Kwame Raoulm
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PERDUE v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2024cv00165
Plaintiff: JEFFERY K. PERDUE
Defendant: INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ROBERT E. CARTER, JR., DENNIS REAGLE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Fukama-Kabika v. Jones
as 2:2024cv02091
Petitioner: Jean A Fukama-Kabika
Respondent: Chance Jones
Not Yet Classified: Habeas Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Giles v. Hughes et al
as 1:2024cv01159
Plaintiff: Anthony Maurice Giles
Defendant: Latoya Hughes, Chance Jones, Cherryle Hinthorne and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HERBERT v. SKINNER et al
as 1:2024cv00452
Plaintiff: Chance Herbert
Defendant: TONY SKINNER, OFFICER FOX, OFFICER KIRBY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jackson v. Jones
as 1:2024cv01657
Petitioner: Sr. Lawrence L Jackson
Respondent: Illinois River Correctional Center and Chance Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cochran v. Jones
as 1:2024cv01275
Petitioner: Jeremiah Cochran
Respondent: Cherryle Hinthorne and Chance Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
RICE v. BISHOP et al
as 1:2024cv00060
Plaintiff: THADDIOUS RICE
Defendant: CHANCE BISHOP, JACKSON and CHLOE WARGNY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

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.


Why Is My Information Online?