Cases 1 - 10 of 539
HAMILTON v. PRETORIUS
as 2:2024cv00185
Petitioner:
MITCHELL HAMILTON
Respondent:
PRETORIUS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hamilton v. Rule
as 4:2024cv00449
Petitioner:
Brenda Hamilton
Respondent:
Warden FNU Rule
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Hamilton v. Kansas, State of
as 5:2024cv03067
Petitioner:
Pierre Quaran Hamilton
Respondent:
Kansas, State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
HAMILTON v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
as 2:2024cv02011
Petitioner:
AMIR HAMILTON
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ezell v. Hamilton
as 24-6085
Petitioner:
JAMES RICKY EZELL, III
Respondent:
COREY DUANE HAMILTON and CASEY HAMILTON
Hamilton v. Warden
as 5:2024cv00065
Petitioner:
Jerry Wayne Hamilton
Respondent:
FCI Texarkana Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Hamilton v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania et al
as 2:2024cv01446
Petitioner:
Barry Lee Hamilton
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA and PENNSYLVANIA ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Austin Hamilton v. Secretary, Department of Corrections, et al
as 24-10790
Petitioner:
AUSTIN ISAAC HAMILTON
Respondent:
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
Hamilton v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania et al
as 3:2024cv00449
Petitioner:
Barry Lee Hamilton
Respondent:
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
David Hamilton v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections
as 24-10716
Petitioner:
DAVID C. HAMILTON
Respondent:
SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
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.
