Cases 41 - 50 of 58
Kirschbaum v. Neven et al
as 2:2012cv01007
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Nevada and D. W. Neven
Petitioner:
John Kirschbaum
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Loucks v. Neven et al
as 2:2012cv00881
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Nevada and D. W. Neven
Petitioner:
Lonnie J. Loucks
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rodriguez v. Neven et al
as 2:2012cv00831
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Nevada and D. W. Neven
Petitioner:
Alvin Mozco Rodriguez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
McMahon v. Neven et al
as 2:2012cv00774
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Nevada and D. W. Neven
Petitioner:
Johnny Edward McMahon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Carr v. Ballard
as 2:2012cv00909
Petitioner:
James D. W. Carr
Respondent:
David Ballard
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Redeker v. Neven et al
as 2:2012cv00397
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Nevada and D. W. Neven
Petitioner:
Arie Robert Redeker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Litwin v. Neven et al
as 2:2011cv01616
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Nevada and D. W. Neven
Petitioner:
Christopher Litwin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Christopher Wentzell v. D. Neven, et al
as 10-16605
Petitioner - Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER N. WENTZELL
Respondent - Appellee:
D. W. NEVEN and NEVADA ATTORNEY GENERAL
Galvan v. Jacquez et al
as 5:2009cv03122
Petitioner:
Ivan Galvan
Respondent:
Francisco Jacquez, Matthew Cate, J. McKinney and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Damien Gibson v. D. Nevens, et al
as 09-16371
Petitioner - Appellant:
DAMIEN J. GIBSON
Respondent - Appellee:
D. W. NEVENS, Warden and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF NEVADA
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.
