Cases 1 - 10 of 24
Shaunte Lamont Johnson Sr. v. Tammy L. Campbell
as 5:2023cv01968
Petitioner:
Shaunte Lamont Johnson, Sr.
Respondent:
Ms. Tammy L. Campbell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Iran Lamont Johnson v. Jim Robertson
as 2:2022cv06215
Petitioner:
Iran Lamont Johnson
Respondent:
Jim Robertson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. Arizona, State of et al
as 2:2019cv02034
Respondent:
Arizona, State of and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Petitioner:
Maurice Lamont Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Johnson v. Tempe, City of
as 4:2017cv00582
Plaintiff:
Maurice Lamont Johnson
Defendant:
Tempe, City of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Arizona Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2017cv00508
Plaintiff:
Maurice Lamont Johnson
Defendant:
Arizona Department of Corrections, Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Johnson v. Ryan et al
as 2:2017cv03680
Petitioner:
Maurice Lamont Johnson
Respondent:
Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Johnson v. Ryan et al
as 2:2017cv03575
Petitioner:
Maurice Lamont Johnson
Respondent:
Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Shaunte Lamont Johnson, Sr. v. Darryl Lynn Exum et al
as 5:2017cv00647
Defendant:
Darryl Lynn Exum and Exum Law Office
Plaintiff:
Shaunte Lamont Johnson, Sr.
Maurice Johnson v. Charles Ryan, et al
as 17-15370
Petitioner - Appellant:
MAURICE LAMONT JOHNSON
Respondent - Appellee:
CHARLES L. RYAN and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Johnson v. Ryan et al
as 2:2017cv00609
Petitioner:
Maurice Lamont Johnson
Respondent:
Charles L Ryan and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
