Cases 1 - 10 of 37
Love v. United States of America
as 3:2023cv00026
Petitioner:
Rodney L. Love
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Martin v. United States Government
as 3:2022cv01060
Petitioner:
Antonio Martin
Respondent:
United States Government
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Threalkill v. United States of America
as 3:2022cv00922
Petitioner:
Kenneth Threalkill
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Starks v. United States Government
as 3:2022cv00731
Petitioner:
Ricky Starks
Respondent:
United States Government
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Faulkner v. United States of America
as 3:2022cv00655
Petitioner:
Benjamin Alexander Faulkner
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Breedlove v. United States of America
as 3:2022cv00618
Plaintiff:
Dionte L. Breedlove
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Keasling v. United States of America
as 3:2022cv00529
Petitioner:
John Michael Keasling
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Woods v. United States of America
as 3:2022cv00440
Petitioner:
Joshua A. Woods
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Ramey v. United States of America
as 3:2022cv00378
Petitioner:
Terious D. Ramey
Respondent:
A.U.S.P. Thomson and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
DODSON v. UNITED STATES
as 1:2022cv00011
Petitioner:
BRIAN DODSON
Respondent:
United States
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
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.
