Cases 1 - 10 of 65
ROGERS v. LEMASTER
as 1:2023cv00235
Petitioner:
Hrondy Tarvus Rogers
Respondent:
Warden David Lemaster and WARDEN, FCI MCKEAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Daniels v. Smeal et al
as 3:2023cv01215
Petitioner:
Jerry Jeron Daniels
Respondent:
Elliot L. Smeal, Roger Leidy, Elda Casillas and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Williams v. Barraza
as 3:2023cv00786
Petitioner:
Roger Kent Williams
Respondent:
Warden Barraza
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Rogers-Watts v. Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2023cv00769
Petitioner:
Michael Rogers-Watts
Respondent:
Bureau of Prisons and Warden Baraza
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
ROGERS v. PECHISHEN et al
as 5:2021cv03679
Petitioner:
MICHAEL ROGERS
Respondent:
DAVID PECHISHEN, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF NORTHAMPTON and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ROGERS v. SUPERNTENDENT, SCI FOREST et al
as 2:2020cv06124
Respondent:
SUPERNTENDENT, SCI FOREST, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY
Petitioner:
WILLIAM ROGERS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ROGERS v. OBERLANDER
as 2:2020cv04360
Respondent:
DEREK OBERLANDER
Petitioner:
KAREEM ROGERS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ROGERS v. WARDEN, U.S.P. CANAAN
as 1:2020cv01257
Petitioner:
Christopher Ray-Bryan Rogers
Respondent:
Warden USP Canaan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Frometa v. Oddo
as 1:2020cv00830
Respondent:
J. Oddo
Petitioner:
Roger Hernandez Frometa
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Rogers v. Warden of USP-Canaan
as 1:2020cv00773
Petitioner:
Christopher Ray-Bryan Rogers
Respondent:
Warden of USP-Canaan
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.
