Cases 1 - 10 of 150
Adrian Riley v. Kris Rish, Warden
as 24-1430
Petitioner:
Adrian Dominic Riley
Respondent:
Kris Rish, Warden--Minnesota Correctional Facility--Rush City
Joseph Saari v. Jesse Pugh, Warden
as 23-3728
Petitioner:
Joseph Thomas Saari
Respondent:
Jesse Pugh, Warden of MCF--Rush City
Ward v. Falkenrath
as 4:2023cv01389
Petitioner:
Kris Eugene Ward
Defendant:
Scanning Program - Jeff City Correctional Center
Respondent:
Superintendent Doris Falkenrath
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Matthews v. Washington County Jail et al
as 5:2023cv05163
Petitioner:
Drew Wilson Matthews
Respondent:
Washington County Jail and City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Joshua Whiteley v. C. Edge
as 23-2701
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Joshua Whiteley
Defendant / Appellee:
C. Edge, Acting Warden, FCI Forrest City, Arkansas (originally named as John P. Yates)
Ware v. Warden, MCF Rush City
as 0:2023cv01918
Petitioner:
Marion Q Ware
Respondent:
Warden, MCF Rush City
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Kevin Bray v. John Yates
as 23-2148
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Kevin Brian Bray
Defendant / Appellee:
John P. Yates, Warden of FCI-Forrest City (Originally named as USA and Doe)
Holliday v. Payne
as 4:2023cv00418
Plaintiff:
Russell Holliday
Defendant:
Faulkner County, Conway, City of, Guy, City of and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Authier v. RRM Kansas City
as 4:2023cv00095
Petitioner:
Melissa Deann Authier
Respondent:
RRM Kansas City
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Nathaniel Mitchell v. John Yates
as 23-1389
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Nathaniel K. Mitchell
Defendant / Appellee:
John P. Yates, Warden, FCI - Forrest City, Arkansas
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.
