Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Babers v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Lake County)
as 5:2024cv00024
Petitioner:
Norman B Babers
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Smith v. Babers et al
as 4:2023cv00449
Petitioner:
Antonio Tevereus Smith
Respondent:
Gwendolyn E Babers and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Richard Baber, Jr. v. Harold Clarke
as 23-6280
Petitioner / Appellant:
RICHARD L. BABER, JR.
Respondent / Appellee:
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections
Howard v. Babers et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2022cv00640
Plaintiff:
Daron Durane Howard, Daron Durane Howard-Bey, Daron Dwane Howard and others
Defendant:
Gwendolyn Babers, Steven T. Marshall, Thomas Hugghins and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Baber v. Augusta County Circuit Court
as 7:2022cv00134
Petitioner:
Richard L. Baber, Jr.
Respondent:
Augusta County Circuit Court
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Babers et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2020cv00590
Defendant:
Rolanda Calloway, Steven T. Marshall and Gwendolyn Babers
Plaintiff:
Frederick Dwight Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Babers v. Shinn et al
as 2:2020cv00308
Respondent:
David Shinn and Attorney General of the State of Arizona
Petitioner:
Corion Kentrail Babers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Baber v. Ray et al
as 3:2019cv00706
Respondent:
Harold Clarke and Tracy Ray
Petitioner:
Matthew Lee Baber
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Baber v. Ray et al
as 3:2019cv00491
Respondent:
Harold Clarke and Tracy Ray
Petitioner:
Matthew Lee Baber
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
McConico v. Babers et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2019cv00195
Defendant:
Moses Moseley, Sharon Brown and Gwendolyn Babers
Plaintiff:
James McConico, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
