Cases 21 - 30 of 501
Whitted v. Warden
as 5:2023cv00778
Petitioner:
Jamaica Dajuan Whitted
Respondent:
United States and Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Quillen-Hawk v. Warden
as 1:2024cv00002
Plaintiff:
Naomi Louise Quillen-Hawk
Defendant:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Purpera v. Rokosky
as 1:2023cv00818
Petitioner:
Frank Craig Purpera, Jr.
Respondent:
Warden Rokosky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Davis v. Warden
as 1:2023cv00813
Petitioner:
Jennifer Davis
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Hernandez-Galvan v. Rokosky
as 1:2023cv00793
Petitioner:
Damian Hernandez-Galvan
Respondent:
Warden Rokosky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Torres v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 5:2023cv00792
Petitioner:
Juan Torres
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, Mid-Atlantic Regional Director, Associate Warden Howell and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Harden v. Warden
as 1:2023cv00789
Petitioner:
Lakesia L. Harden
Respondent:
United States of America
Defendant:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Bortle v. Rodosky
as 1:2023cv00782
Petitioner:
Marcus Ray Bortle
Respondent:
Warden Rodosky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Shands v. Rokosky
as 1:2023cv00772
Petitioner:
Johnny Shands, Jr.
Respondent:
Warden Rokosky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Howard v. Rokosky
as 1:2023cv00755
Petitioner:
William Howard, Jr.
Respondent:
Warden Rokosky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
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.
