Cases 11 - 20 of 789
Hayden v. Hughes et al
as 1:2023cv01442
Petitioner:
Richard T Hayden
Respondent:
Latoya Hughes, Cherryl Hinthorne and Kwame Raoule
Not Classified By Court:
Habeas Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dyer v. Gaines et al
as 2:2024cv00280
Plaintiff:
Lester R Dyer, III
Defendant:
Sgt. Perrin Gaines, Kevin Mosley, Nathaniel Schuh and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Cunningham v. Hughes
as 1:2024cv00013
Petitioner:
Matthew Cunningham
Respondent:
Langford Hughes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hughes v. Sollie
as 3:2023cv03182
Plaintiff:
Marcus Hughes
Defendant:
Billy Sollie
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
HUGHES v. WARDEN
as 2:2023cv00538
Petitioner:
DARRELL WAYNE HUGHES
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Luevano v. Miller
as 23-50729
Petitioner / Appellant:
Jaime Luevano
Respondent / Appellee:
Gene Miller, Warden, Hughes Unit, Antonio Guterres, United Nations Director, Nikki H, U.S. Ambassador and others
Brown v. Hughes
as 3:2023cv00537
Petitioner:
Darrell Brown
Respondent:
Craig Hughes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WATSON v. SOUTH GEORGIA JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
as 1:2023cv00172
Petitioner:
HUGH ZACHARY WATSON
Respondent:
SOUTH GEORGIA JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Eason v. Raoul et al
as 3:2023cv50352
Petitioner:
Hannibal Eason
Respondent:
Kwame Raoul, Latoya Hughes and Tarry Williams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lynch v. Hughes
as 4:2023cv00099
Petitioner:
Donald M Lynch
Respondent:
Graig Hughes
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.
