Cases 41 - 50 of 76
Clark v. Warden, SCI Frackville et al
as 1:2015cv00161
Petitioner:
Melvin Lewis Clark
Respondent:
Warden, SCI Frackville and PA State Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Lewis v. Maiorana
as 3:2015cv00092
Petitioner:
William Solomon Lewis
Respondent:
C. Maiorana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Lewis v. Warden, U.S.P. Canaan
as 3:2014cv02325
Petitioner:
William Solomon Lewis
Respondent:
Warden, U.S.P. Canaan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
LEWIS v. WENEROWICZ et al
as 2:2014cv06818
Petitioner:
HAKIM LEWIS
Respondent:
MICHAEL WENEROWICZ and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
MICKEL v. PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE et al
as 1:2014cv00297
Petitioner:
RONALD LEWIS MICKEL, JR.
Respondent:
PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PEW v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2014cv03868
Petitioner:
ALFONSO PERCY PEW
Respondent:
JOHN E. WETZEL, JOHN KERESTES, SHARON LUQUIS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
LEWIS v. WALSH et al
as 2:2014cv01908
Petitioner:
BRAHEEM LEWIS
Respondent:
JEROME WALSH, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
BOGGS v. ROZUM et al
as 3:2014cv00034
Petitioner:
LEWIS BOGGS
Respondent:
GERALD ROZUM and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
LEE v. KERESTES et al
as 2:2014cv00140
Petitioner:
LEWIS JEROME LEE
Respondent:
JOHN W. KERESTES and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
LEWIS v. WOLFE et al
as 2:2013cv07269
Petitioner:
ANTHONY RASHAN LEWIS
Respondent:
WILLIAMS J. WOLFE, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF LANCASTER and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
