Cases 1 - 10 of 303
SMALL v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2024cv00942
Petitioner:
GEORGE ANDRE SMALL
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 st Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BARNES v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 2:2024cv00236
Petitioner:
SAMAJUI D. BARNES
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
STONE-DUNLAP v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2024cv00551
Petitioner:
ERIC STONE-DUNLAP
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
COVINGTON v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2024cv00740
Petitioner:
DAVID GEAN COVINGTON
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ROYAL v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2024cv00738
Petitioner:
DENAR ROYAL
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 st Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ANDERSON v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 2:2024cv00156
Petitioner:
LLOYD ANDERSON
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
MEADOWS v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2024cv00270
Petitioner:
TIMOTHY MEADOWS
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WHITE v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2024cv00184
Petitioner:
RAYMOND C. WHITE
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
PIRANT v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2023cv02290
Petitioner:
JAMIL M. PIRANT
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
Defendant:
ELI LILLY AND COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WEBB v. STATE OF INDIANA
as 1:2024cv00028
Petitioner:
MERLE R. WEBB
Respondent:
STATE OF INDIANA
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.
