Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Craig Dawson, et al v. T. Givens, et al
as 16-35886
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CRAIG THOMAS DAWSON and LOLA GLENN
Defendant - Appellee:
T. GIVENS, PHILLIPI, JEFF PREMO, Superintendent and others
Dawson v. Premo et al
as 6:2015cv00568
Petitioner:
Craig Thomas Dawson
Respondent:
Jeff Premo, State Parole Board and Washington County D.A.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dawson v. Premo et al
as 6:2014cv01100
Petitioner:
Craig Thomas Dawson
Respondent:
Oregon State Penn and Supt. Jeff Premo
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Craig Dawson v. Brian Belleque
as 12-35569
Petitioner - Appellant:
CRAIG THOMAS DAWSON
Respondent - Appellee:
BRIAN BELLEQUE
Craig Dawson v. Brian Belleque
as 12-35555
Petitioner - Appellant:
CRAIG THOMAS DAWSON
Respondent - Appellee:
BRIAN BELLEQUE
Craig Dawson, et al v. Finn, et al
as 11-35747
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CRAIG THOMAS DAWSON and SUSAN DAWSON
Defendant - Appellee:
FINN, Prison Guard, RICHARDS, Prison Guard, JEFF PREMO, Supt. Oregon State Penitentiary and others
Craig Dawson, et al v. Finn, et al
as 11-35486
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CRAIG THOMAS DAWSON and SUSAN DAWSON
Defendant - Appellee:
FINN, Prison Guard, RICHARDS, Prison Guard, JEFF PREMO, Supt. Oregon State Penitentiary and others
Dawson et al v. Finn et al
as 3:2010cv01473
Defendant:
Ms. Clemente, Finn, Jeff Premo and others
Plaintiff:
Craig Thomas Dawson and Susan Dawson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dawson v. Draves et al
as 3:2010cv01143
Plaintiff:
Craig Thomas Dawson
Defendant:
Donald Draves, Ms. Gitnes, J. Kamins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Craig Dawson v. Oregon State Board of Parole &
as 10-35070
Petitioner - Appellant:
CRAIG THOMAS DAWSON
Respondent - Appellee:
OREGON STATE BOARD OF PAROLE & POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
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.
