Cases 61 - 70 of 196
WEITZEL v. ROZUM et al
as 2:2012cv01338
Petitioner:
BRADLEY C. WEITZEL
Respondent:
GERALD ROZUM, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BUTLER COUNTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
COPELAND v. ROZUM et al
as 2:2012cv05187
Petitioner:
YUSUF COPELAND
Respondent:
GERALD ROZUM and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Eric Hall v. Gerald Rozum, et al
as 12-3518
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ERIC HALL
Defendant - Appellee:
GERALD ROZUM and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
Louis Paolicelli v. Gerald Rozum, et al
as 12-3206
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LOUIS PAOLICELLI
Defendant - Appellee:
GERALD ROZUM, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY ALLEGHENY COUNTY
FRANKS v. ROZUM et al
as 2:2012cv03869
Petitioner:
JAMES E. FRANKS
Respondent:
GERALD ROZUM, THOMAS CORBETT and R. SETH WILLIAMS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
David Rodriguez v. Gerald Rozum, et al
as 12-2881
Plaintiff - Appellee:
DAVID RODRIGUEZ
Defendant - Appellant:
GERALD ROZUM, DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA and ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
Gale v. Rozem et al
as 1:2012cv01315
Petitioner:
Andre Gale
Respondent:
PA State Attorney General, Gerald Rozum and Edward Marsico
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
PALMER v. ROZUM et al
as 2:2012cv03303
Petitioner:
WALTER PALMER
Respondent:
GERALD ROZUM, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BUCKS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PA.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Anthony Smith v. Gerald Rozum, et al
as 12-2471
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ANTHONY SMITH
Defendant - Appellee:
GERALD ROZUM and DISTRICT ATTORNEY ALLEGHENY COUNTY
WARRINGTON v. ROZUM et al
as 2:2012cv02693
Petitioner:
KEITH WARRINGTON
Respondent:
GERALD ROZUM, 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
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.
