Cases 51 - 60 of 61
Kelly v. Davenport et al
as 1:2011cv01319
Petitioner:
Terry Kelly
Respondent:
Carter Davenport and Attorney General of State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Mays v. Davenport et al
as 2:2011cv01012
Petitioner:
Michael Mays
Respondent:
Carter Davenport , State of Alabama and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Scales v. Davenport et al
as 4:2011cv00231
Petitioner:
Louis Joesph Scales
Respondent:
Carter Davenport and Attorney General of State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Scott v. Davenport et al
as 5:2011cv00037
Petitioner:
Corey M Scott
Respondent:
Carter Davenport and Attorney General of the State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Ball v. Davenport et al
as 4:2010cv03609
Petitioner:
Gregory Ball
Respondent:
Carter Davenport and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Bagley v. Carter et al
as 1:2010cv01026
Petitioner:
James Edward Bagley
Respondent:
Carter and Attorney General of the State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Quick v. Carter et al
as 5:2009cv00950
Petitioner:
Robbie Quick
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The and Mary Carter
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Newton v. Carter et al
as 7:2009cv00928
Petitioner:
Shaquinta Denise Newton
Respondent:
Mary Carter and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Tice v. King et al
as 5:2009cv00011
Petitioner:
Sammy J. Tice
Respondent:
Troy King, Richard Allen and Bettina Carter
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Carter v. Hetzel et al
as 2:2008cv01111
Petitioner:
Luther Charles Carter
Respondent:
Gary Hetzel and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
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.
