Cases 21 - 30 of 63
BISHOP v. SMITH et al
as 2:2022cv01186
Petitioner:
SCOTT BISHOP
Respondent:
BARRY SMITH, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
VEGA v. WEISS
as 2:2021cv05157
Petitioner:
JAZMIN S. VEGA
Respondent:
SCOTT WEISS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
SCOTT v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
as 2:2021cv00438
Petitioner:
TONIA SCOTT
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
HARGROVE v. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS et al
as 2:2020cv06584
Respondent:
JUDGE SUSAN IRIS SCHULMAN, JUDGE ZACHARY C SHAFFER, JUDGE SCOTT DICLAUDIO and others
Petitioner:
RAYMOND HARGROVE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
SCOTT v. RANSOM et al
as 2:2020cv06198
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and KEVIN RANSOM
Petitioner:
NALIK SHARIFF SCOTT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ALBANESE v. FINLEY et al
as 2:2020cv05352
Respondent:
WARDEN SCOTT FINLEY and F.C.I. SCHUYKILL
Petitioner:
NICHOLAS ALBANESE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
BEY v. WOELPPER et al
as 2:2020cv05103
Respondent:
ADA KOLLEEN MCMULLEN, TRANSIT P/O ROONEY, TRANSIT P/O CAMBURN and others
Petitioner:
RESHAN SAVAGE BEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
SCOTT v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
as 2:2020cv03497
Petitioner:
ROBERT SCOTT
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
SCOTT v. MCGINLEY et al
as 2:2020cv02563
Respondent:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, THOMAS S. MCGINLEY and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Petitioner:
EDWARD SCOTT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
HIGDON v. FINLEY
as 2:2020cv00515
Respondent:
SCOTT FINLEY
Petitioner:
JOEMON D. HIGDON
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.
