Cases 1 - 10 of 11
TAFT v. GEROGE W HILL
as 2:2019cv03721
Plaintiff:
CLEVELAND TAFT, III
Defendant:
GEROGE W HILL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CLEVELAND v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2016cv03146
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff:
KEVIN CLEVELAND
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
PARKER v. GREGORY et al
as 2:2016cv02943
Plaintiff:
JASON PARKER
Defendant:
DARNELL GREGORY, CLEVELAND, ROBINSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CLEVELAND v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF
as 2:2016cv00640
Petitioner:
FREDDIE CLEVELAND
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv02315
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
JARRETT v. COMMUNITY EDUCATION CENTER COMPANY et al
as 2:2013cv07244
Plaintiff:
ROBERT JARRETT
Defendant:
COMMUNITY EDUCATION CENTER COMPANY, JOHN CLANCY, RODNEY BROCKENBROUGH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CLEVELAND v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2012cv06696
Petitioner:
KEVIN CLEVELAND
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
PHILLIPS v. SAVEN et al
as 5:2011cv07573
Petitioner:
WILLIE CLEVELAND PHILLIPS
Respondent:
D SAVEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BERKS COUNTY and PA STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
LOFTON v. EASTERN DISTRICT SUPREME COURT et al
as 2:2009cv05503
Petitioner:
CLEVELAND LOFTON
Respondent:
EASTERN DISTRICT SUPREME COURT, RAYMOND LAWLER, HARRISBURG, PA BOARD OF PROBATION & PAROLE and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
CLEVELAND v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2009cv00673
Petitioner:
KEVIN CLEVELAND
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
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.
