Cases 1 - 10 of 256
DAVIS v. BOWEN et al
as 5:2024cv00104
Petitioner:
NORMAN DAVIS
Respondent:
Warden TOMMY BOWEN and CENTRAL STATE PRISON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bowens v. Allen
as 1:2023cv05689
Petitioner:
Rodqucus Bowens and Rodqueus Bowens
Respondent:
Marty Allen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Vice v. State of Iowa et al
as 4:2023cv00406
Petitioner:
Chad M. Vice
Respondent:
State of Iowa, Iowa Department of Corrections, Beth Skinner and others
Interested Party:
Aaron Rogers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Verdin v. Bowen
as 5:2023cv00812
Petitioner:
Rick Adam Verdin
Respondent:
Mark Bowen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BOWENS v. SEVIER
as 1:2023cv01453
Petitioner:
COREY BOWENS
Respondent:
MARK SEVIER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BOWEN v. ZAKEN
as 2:2023cv02253
Petitioner:
DWIGHT BOWEN
Respondent:
MICHAEL ZAKEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WHITTENBURG v. OLIVER et al
as 4:2023cv00067
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM HOYT WHITTENBURG
Defendant:
Tyrone Oliver and Tommy Bowen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BOWENS v. DUNS
as 3:2023cv07353
Petitioner:
E-YAGE BOWENS
Defendant:
DUNS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Akeem Bowen v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al
as 23-11025
Petitioner / Appellant:
AKEEM RYAN BOWEN
Respondent / Appellee:
SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
Whittenburg v. Oliver et al
as 4:2023cv00048
Petitioner:
William Hoyt Whittenburg
Respondent:
Tyrone Oliver and Tommy Bowen
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.
