Cases 51 - 60 of 121
HUGHES v. LEVENHAGEN
as 2:2013cv00074
Petitioner:
DARRELL WAYNE HUGHES
Respondent:
MARK LEVENHAGEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HUGHES v. LEVENHAGEN
as 2:2013cv00078
Petitioner:
DARRELL WAYNE HUGHES
Respondent:
MARK LEVENHAGEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HUGHES v. LEVENHAGEN
as 2:2013cv00077
Petitioner:
DARRELL WAYNE HUGHES
Respondent:
MARK LEVENHAGEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HUGHES v. LEVENHAGEN
as 2:2013cv00079
Petitioner:
DARRELL WAYNE HUGHES
Respondent:
MARK LEVENHAGEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HUGHES v. LEVENHAGEN
as 2:2013cv00071
Petitioner:
DARRELL WAYNE HUGHES
Respondent:
MARK LEVENHAGEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rust v. Levenhagen et al
as 1:2012cv10324
Petitioner:
Ricky L. Rust
Respondent:
Mark Levenhagen and Attorney General of the State of Indiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Honorable v. Lemmon et al
as 3:2012cv00493
Plaintiff:
Jerry T Honorable
Defendant:
Bruce Lemmon , Edwin G Buss , Mark Levenhagen and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Ransom v. Indiana State of et al
as 3:2012cv00065
Plaintiff:
Marwan Ransom
Defendant:
Indiana State of , Indiana Department of Corrections , Bruce Lemmon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Bained v. Indiana State of et al
as 3:2012cv00062
Plaintiff:
Emanuel Bained
Defendant:
Indiana State of , Indiana Department of Corrections , Bruce Lemmon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Garner v. Indiana State of et al
as 3:2012cv00048
Plaintiff:
Martin Garner
Defendant:
Indiana State of , Indiana Department of Corrections , Bruce Lemmon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
