Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Thomas Ingram, Jr. v. State of North Carolina
as 23-6354
Petitioner / Appellant:
THOMAS DAVIS INGRAM, JR.
Respondent / Appellee:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Ingram v. State of North Carolina
as 5:2022hc02198
Petitioner:
Thomas Davis Ingram, Jr.
Respondent:
State of North Carolina
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Ingram v. State of North Carolina
as 5:2022hc02109
Petitioner:
Thomas Davis Ingram, Jr.
Respondent:
State of North Carolina
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
DAVIS v. THE PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
as 2:2020cv01745
Respondent:
PENNSYLVANIA ATTORNEY GENERAL and THE PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
Petitioner:
THOMAS DAVIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
DAVIS v. THOMPSON et al
as 2:2017cv00861
Petitioner:
THOMAS DAVIS
Respondent:
BRIAN THOMPSON and S.C.I. MERCER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Thomas Davis v. Secretary, Department of Corre, et al
as 15-15731
Petitioner - Appellant:
THOMAS DAVIS
Respondent - Appellee:
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
Davis v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 6:2014cv01784
Petitioner:
Thomas Davis
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Attorney General, State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
DAVIS v. WARDEN, S.C.I. MERCER
as 2:2014cv01387
Petitioner:
THOMAS DAVIS
Respondent:
WARDEN, S.C.I. MERCER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
DAVIS v. THE WARDEN OF THE STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION MERCER
as 2:2014cv00271
Petitioner:
THOMAS DAVIS
Respondent:
THE WARDEN OF THE STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION MERCER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Thomas Davis v. Attorney General of Maryland
as 13-7222
Petitioner - Appellant:
THOMAS DAVIS, a/k/a Thomas Edwards
Respondent - Appellee:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND and BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden
Respondent:
JOHN ROWLEY
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.
