Cases 1 - 10 of 142
BRASHEAR v. WARDEN (N.C.C.F.)
as 1:2024cv00727
Petitioner:
EDWARD BRASHEAR
Respondent:
WARDEN (N.C.C.F.)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jackson, III v. Warden
as 2:2024cv00010
Petitioner:
David Edward Jackson, III
Defendant:
Warden
Respondent:
Indiana Parole Board
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Williams v. Sheriff
as 1:2023cv00156
Petitioner:
Edward Williams
Respondent:
Sheriff
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Pratcher v. Sheriff
as 3:2023cv00067
Petitioner:
Deuntay Edward Pratcher and Deuntay E Pratcher
Respondent:
Sheriff
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
PURNELL v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2022cv02355
Petitioner:
EDWARD PURNELL
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 st Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SWEENEY v. WARDEN
as 3:2022cv00188
Petitioner:
CHARLES EDWARD SWEENEY, JR.
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SWEENEY v. MITCHELL
as 3:2022cv00178
Petitioner:
CHARLES EDWARD SWEENEY, JR.
Respondent:
DANNY MITCHELL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hampton v. Warden
as 3:2022cv00885
Petitioner:
Edward M Hampton and Edward Mitchell Hampton
Respondent:
Warden
Not Classified By Court:
MIAMI E-FILE(Court Use Only) and WESTVILLE E-FILE(Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
EDWARDS v. KALLIS
as 2:2022cv00240
Petitioner:
ANTONIO EDWARDS
Respondent:
S. KALLIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
EDWARDS v. KALLIS
as 2:2022cv00179
Plaintiff:
LOGAN S. EDWARDS, III
Defendant:
T. RULE
Respondent:
STEVEN KALLIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
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.
