Cases 1 - 10 of 99
Mark Gooding v. Parole Board, et al
as 24-1438
Petitioner:
MARK ANTHONY GOODING
Respondent:
PAROLE BOARD and MICHELLE FLOYD, Warden
Samuel Good Jr v. People of State of California
as 2:2024cv02649
Petitioner:
Samuel Good, Jr.
Respondent:
People of State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
GOOD v. TICE et al
as 5:2023cv04319
Petitioner:
CRAIG GOOD
Respondent:
TICE, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BERKS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Goode v. Clarke
as 1:2023cv01274
Petitioner:
Nasir K. Goode
Respondent:
Harold Clarke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Woodroff v. Smith et al
as 6:2023cv00262
Plaintiff:
Jonathan David Woodroff
Defendant:
Shannon Smith, Adam Good, Steve Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Goode v. Moses
as 2:2023cv01085
Petitioner:
Dushane Eric Goode
Respondent:
Myron Moses
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
GOODE v. A-CRUZ et al
as 2:2023cv02104
Petitioner:
RONALD GOODE
Respondent:
A-CRUZ, THOMAS M. ZALESKI, BRIAN WERNER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Goods v. Daley
as 2:2023cv00063
Petitioner:
Terrill Goods, Sr.
Respondent:
James A. Daley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Goods v. Daley
as 2:2023cv00062
Petitioner:
Terrill Goods, Sr.
Respondent:
James A. Daley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Williams v. Director, TDCJ
as 6:2023cv00241
Petitioner:
Jay Edward Williams
Intervenor Plaintiff:
Ronald Scott Good
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ
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.
