Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Abdullah #40697 v. Shinn et al
as 4:2023cv00025
Petitioner:
Seymour Jameel Abdullah
Respondent:
David Shinn, Charles Ryan, Mark Brnovich and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
John Demos, Jr. v. Virginia Company, et al
as 22-35795
Petitioner / Appellant:
JOHN ROBERT DEMOS, Jr.
Respondent / Appellee:
VIRGINIA COMPANY, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Demos v. Virginia Company et al
as 2:2022cv01069
Petitioner:
John Robert Demos, Jr
Respondent:
Virginia Company, United States of America and District of Columbia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Adrian Moon v. County of Los Angeles Probation Dept. et al
as 2:2018cv05793
Petitioner:
Adrian Moon
Respondent:
Judge Virginia A. Phillips and County of Los Angeles Probation Dept.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Thomas v. Ryan et al
as 2:2017cv01076
Petitioner:
Thomas Sparks Thomas
Respondent:
Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Virginia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Wilson v. Second Judicial Court et al
as 2:2016cv03772
Petitioner:
Dean Wilson
Respondent:
Second Judicial Court, Brad Newman, Walter Hennessy and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Virginia Frazier v. Deborah Johnson
as 13-55335
Petitioner - Appellant:
VIRGINIA FRAZIER
Respondent - Appellee:
DEBORAH K. JOHNSON
Virginia Frazier v. Lattimore
as 1:2010cv00128
Petitioner:
Virginia Frazier
Respondent:
M. Lattimore
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Virginia Grafton v. Tina Hornbeak, et al
as 09-15965
Petitioner - Appellant:
VIRGINIA GRAFTON
Respondent - Appellee:
TINA HORNBEAK, Warden and BOARD OF PAROLE HEARINGS
Grafton v. Hornbeak, et al.
as 1:2008cv01037
Petitioner:
Virginia Grafton
Respondent:
Tina Hornbeak and Board of Parole Hearings
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
