Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Rapozo v. Hawaii, State of
as 1:2023cv00188
Petitioner:
Richard B. Rapozo and Richard Ropozo and Richard Borges Rapozo
Respondent:
Attorney General Hawaii, State of, Warden Shawn Wead and Anne E. Lopez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Untalan v. Derr
as 1:2023cv00091
Petitioner:
Maria E. Untalan
Respondent:
Warden Estela Derr
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Marler v. Derr
as 1:2022cv00240
Petitioner:
Thomas E. Marler
Respondent:
Estela Derr
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Marler v. Derr
as 1:2022cv00129
Petitioner:
Thomas E. Marler
Respondent:
Estela Derr
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Gilroy v. State of Hawaii et al
as 1:2020cv00037
Respondent:
Amy M. Murikami, Melvin H. Fujino, Paul R. Mow and others
Petitioner:
William Gilroy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Gilroy v. State of Hawaii et al
as 1:2019cv00479
Plaintiff:
William Gilroy
Defendant:
Amy M. Murikami, Melvin H. Fujino, Clare E. Connors and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Kehano v. Harrington et al
as 1:2016cv00589
Plaintiff:
Roland I. Kehano, Sr.
Defendant:
Scott Harrington, Richard Bissen, Jr., Davelynn M. Tengan and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Kehano v. Sequeira et al
as 1:2016cv00006
Petitioner:
Roland I. Kehano, Sr.
Respondent:
Francis X. Sequeira, Richard T. Bissen, Davelynn M. Tengan and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Fagaragan v. Thomas et al
as 1:2010cv00591
Petitioner:
Erwin E. Fagaragan
Respondent:
Todd Thomas and Attorney General of the State of Hawaii
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Torres v. State of Hawaii
as 1:2009cv00506
Petitioner:
Rodney E. Torres
Respondent:
State of Hawaii
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.
