Cases 21 - 30 of 1,566
Beggs v. Mason
as 1:2024cv03002
Petitioner:
Forrest Arthur Beggs
Respondent:
Dean Mason
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dean vs. Hooper
as 2:2024cv00095
Defendant:
Joshua P Dean and Tim Hooper
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Louisiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Salsbury v. Gray
as 1:2024cv10052
Petitioner:
Arthur E. Salsbury
Respondent:
Dean Gray
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Salsbury v. Gray
as 1:2024cv10050
Petitioner:
Arthur E. Salsbury and Arthur E. Salsbury, Jr.
Respondent:
Dean Gray
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Smith v. Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
as 6:2023cv00885
Petitioner:
Roy Dean Smith
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Steenhard v. State of Minnesota
as 0:2023cv03844
Petitioner:
James Dean Steenhard
Respondent:
State of Minnesota
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Steenhard v. State of Minnesota
as 4:2023cv00510
Petitioner:
James Dean Steenhard
Respondent:
State of Minnesota
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pettigrew v. Oliver
as 4:2023cv00347
Petitioner:
Matthew Dean Pettigrew
Respondent:
Tyrone Oliver
Not Classified By Court:
Attorney General State of Georgia (Notice Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Fleury v. Jacquez
as 3:2023cv01753
Petitioner:
Dean Allen Fleury
Respondent:
Israel Jacquez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Dean v. Dart et al
as 1:2023cv16236
Petitioner:
Frederick Dean
Respondent:
Tom Dart
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.
