Cases 1 - 10 of 10
John Lofton v. R. Spurgeon, et al
as 10-55986
Petitioner - Appellant:
JOHN FITZGERALD LOFTON
Respondent - Appellee:
R. SPURGEON, Acting Executive Director and TOM VOSS, Executive Director Coalinga State Hospital
Clyde Moss v. Tom Vo
as 10-15367
Petitioner - Appellant:
CLYDE SHERWOOD MOSS
Respondent - Appellee:
TOM VOSS, Executive Director Coalinga State Hospital
Moss v. Voss
as 2:2007cv02429
Petitioner:
Clyde Sherwood Moss
Respondent:
Tom Voss
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
McCurdy v. Mayberg et al
as 5:2007cv03657
Petitioner:
Rex McCurdy
Respondent:
Stephen W. Mayberg and Tom Voss
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
McCurdy v. Mayberg et al
as 2:2007cv01059
Petitioner:
Rex A. McCurdy
Respondent:
Stephen W Mayberg and Tom Voss
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Weathington v. Voss
as 1:2007cv00728
Petitioner:
Anthony Weathington
Respondent:
Tom Voss
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Weathington v. Mayberg et al
as 2:2007cv00925
Petitioner:
Anthony Weathington
Respondent:
Stephen W Mayberg and Tom Voss
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Anthony Weathington v. Stephen W Mayberg et al
as 2:2007cv02814
Petitioner:
Anthony Weathington, .
Respondent:
Stephen W Mayberg and Tom Voss
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Anthony Weathington v. Tom Voss
as 2:2007cv02659
Petitioner:
Anthony Weathington, .
Respondent:
Tom Voss
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Albert F Salcedo v. Stephen W Mayberg et al
as 2:2007cv02435
Petitioner:
Albert F Salcedo
Respondent:
Stephen W Mayberg and Tom Voss
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.
