Cases 1 - 10 of 2,246
KING et al
as 2:2024cv00216
Petitioner:
DANIEL C. KING
Respondent:
INDIANA PAROLE BOARD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Xia v. King
as 0:2024cv02000
Petitioner:
Zhijun Xia
Respondent:
Mark King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Abellard v. M.J. King
as 1:2024cv03719
Plaintiff:
Euzebelin Abellards
Defendant:
M.J. King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
KING v. ALAMANCE DISTRICT ATTORNEY et al
as 1:2024cv00426
Petitioner:
ROBERT CHARLES ANTHONY KING
Respondent:
ALAMANCE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SEAN BOONE, MAGGIE BREWER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
King v. Secretary, Department of Corrections
as 3:2024cv00486
Petitioner:
Darrell Glenn King
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
King v. Watson
as 2:2024cv02365
Petitioner:
Richard N. King
Respondent:
Tom Watson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
KING v. HOLLIBAUGH et al
as 2:2024cv00704
Petitioner:
JAMES KING
Respondent:
KENNETH R. HOLLIBAUGH and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
King v. United States of America
as 1:2024cv03704
Petitioner:
Andre King
Respondent:
of America United States
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Carpenter v. King et al
as 1:2024cv00465
Petitioner:
Carli Carpenter
Respondent:
Chris King, Kym Worthy, Patricia Penman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Carpenter v. King et al
as 2:2024cv11176
Petitioner:
Carli Carpenter
Respondent:
C. King, Kym Worthy, Patricia Penman and others
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.
