Cases 1 - 10 of 283
TERRY v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
as 1:2024cv00385
Petitioner:
DOYLE KENT TERRY
Respondent:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Heard v. Secretary, Department of Corrections
as 3:2024cv00092
Petitioner:
Doyle L. Heard
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Young v. Garland
as 1:2024cv00217
Petitioner:
Timothy Doyle Young
Respondent:
Merrick Garland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HEARD v. DIXON et al
as 3:2024cv00002
Petitioner:
DOYLE L HEARD
Respondent:
RICKY DIXON and ASHLEY B MOODY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Doyle v. Lumpkin
as 6:2023cv00824
Petitioner:
Rico Doyle
Respondent:
Warden Patrick Cooper and Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Doyle v. State of Nevada
as 3:2023cv00437
Petitioner:
Brett Doyle
Respondent:
State of Nevada
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Doyle v. Yates
as 2:2023cv00047
Plaintiff:
Richard Jerel Doyle
Defendant:
John P Yates
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Thornton v. Pittman et al
as 3:2023cv00129
Petitioner:
Shedrick Thornton
Respondent:
Michael Pittman, FNU Doyle, FNU Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Thornton v. Pittman et al
as 3:2022cv02888
Petitioner:
Shedrick Thornton
Respondent:
Michael Pittman, FNU Doyle, FNU Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Doyle v. Supreme Court of the State of Montana
as 2:2022cv00086
Petitioner:
Keith Doyle
Respondent:
Supreme Court of the State of Montana
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.
