Cases 1 - 9 of 9
(PC) Mack v. Schwarzneggar et al
as 2:2024cv01221
Plaintiff:
Anthony E. Mack
Defendant:
Arnold Schwarzneggar, Edmund G. Brown, Gavin Newsom and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Craig Anthony Ross v. Jeanne Woodford, et al
as 2:1996cv02720
Respondent:
Arthur Calderon
Unknown:
Lisa J Brault, Daniel E Lungren, Susan D Martynec and others
Petitioner:
Craig Anthony Ross
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Bryan Mincey, et al v. Jeanne Woodford
as 2:1993cv02554
Unknown:
CAAG, Death Penalty H/C Law Clerks, Tracy Rice and others
Petitioner:
Bryan Joseph Mincey
Respondent:
Jeanne Woodford
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Bobby Neal Lott v. Larry Witek, et al
as 2:1996cv03122
Respondent:
California Institute for Men, California State Attorney General, Daniel E Lungren, . and others
Petitioner:
Bobby Neal Lott
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Diaz v. Vasquez, et al
as 2:1993cv06309
Respondent:
Arthur Calderon, Daniel E Lungren, . and Daniel Vasquez
Petitioner:
Robert Rubane Diaz
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Norman Williams v. W A Duncan, et al
as 2:1998cv05538
Respondent:
W A Duncan and Daniel E Lungren, .
Petitioner:
Norman Williams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Arteaga v. Wilson et al
as 2:2008cv00089
Petitioner:
Lorenzo Arteaga
Respondent:
Pete Wilson, George Deukmejian, Arnold Schwarzenegger and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Seenyur v. Dept of Corrections, et al
as 3:1999cv01589
Plaintiff:
Antonio Seenyur
Defendant:
Dept of Corrections and Daniel E Lungren
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Rodriguez v. Lungren, et al
as 3:1995cv01248
Petitioner:
Alvaro Rodriguez
Respondent:
Daniel E. Lungren
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
