Cases 11 - 20 of 601
DOOLEY v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 1:2017cv01619
Petitioner:
DORRIS L Y DOOLEY
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DOOLEY v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 1:2017cv01618
Petitioner:
DORRIS L Y DOOLEY
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
COMBS v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 2:2017cv00216
Petitioner:
MICHAEL COMBS
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Miscellaneou:
WVCF (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WEDDLE v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 2:2017cv00219
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Petitioner:
JAMIE SCOTT WEDDLE
Miscellaneou:
WVCF (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
TODD v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 2:2017cv00218
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Petitioner:
MYRON TODD
Miscellaneou:
WVCF (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
MEECE v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 2:2017cv00213
Petitioner:
WARREN C. MEECE
Miscellaneou:
PUTNAMVILLE CF (Court Use Only)
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
DOSSETT v SUPERINTENDENT
as 1:2017cv01521
Petitioner:
BRENDA DOSSETT
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
TOWNSEND v. CATECKY
as 1:2017cv01513
Respondent:
S. CATECKY
Miscellaneou:
PENDLETON CF (Court Use Only)
Petitioner:
JAMES TOWNSEND
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
AUSHERMAN v. W.V.C.F.
as 2:2017cv00211
Petitioner:
JACOB D. AUSHERMAN
Respondent:
W.V.C.F.
Miscellaneou:
WVCF (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SEYMORE v. SUPERINTENDENT
as 1:2017cv01404
Petitioner:
LAMONT A. SEYMORE, III
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
