Cases 1 - 10 of 35
Walking Eagle (PS) v. Williams
as 1:2024cv01372
Petitioner:
Kevin Walking Eagle
Respondent:
J. Williams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd - Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Eagle v. Nunn
as 6:2022cv00118
Petitioner:
Clifford W. Eagle
Respondent:
Scott Nunn
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Eagle v. Federal Bureau of Prisons & State of California
as 4:2022cv02022
Petitioner:
Dennis Ray Eagle
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons & State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Eagles v. Gitter et al
as 3:2020cv00514
Respondent:
William Gitter, Nevada Attorney General and William Gittere
Petitioner:
Bryan Eagles
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Chiarizio v. Murrill et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2020cv00582
Defendant:
Charles Tipton, Alabama Department of Corrections, Karla Walker Jones and others
Plaintiff:
Brian Chiarizio
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
El v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 6:2020cv01111
Petitioner:
Eagle Talent El and Curtis Thomas
Respondent:
Attorney General, State of Florida and Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
El v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2020cv00692
Petitioner:
Eagle Talent El and Curtis Thomas
Respondent:
Attorney General, State of Florida and Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Eagle Boy v. Nebraska Attorney General
as 4:2018cv03021
Petitioner:
Charles R. Eagle Boy
Respondent:
Nebraska Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Eagle v. Sharp
as 5:2016cv00055
Plaintiff:
Benjamin L Eagle
Defendant:
Shelia Sharp
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
EAGLE v. SHARP
as 1:2016cv00183
Plaintiff:
BENJAMIN L. EAGLE
Defendant:
SHEILA A SHARP
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.
