Cases 171 - 180 of 412
Enver Karafili v. James Tilton, et al
as 09-55388
Petitioner - Appellant:
ENVER KARAFILI
Respondent - Appellee:
JAMES E. TILTON, Warden and EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr., Attorney General of the State of California
Nathan Turner v. James Tilton
as 09-55310
Petitioner - Appellant:
NATHAN KEVIN TURNER
Respondent - Appellee:
JAMES E. TILTON
Bobby Janoe v. James Tilton, et al
as 09-55300
Petitioner - Appellant:
BOBBY SHAWN JANOE
Respondent - Appellee:
JAMES E. TILTON and EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr.
DeAundre Bowman v. James Tilton
as 09-55298
Petitioner - Appellant:
DEAUNDRE LOUIS BOWMAN
Respondent - Appellee:
JAMES E. TILTON, Secretary California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Kinzie Gene Noordman v. James E. Tilton
as 5:2009cv00409
Plaintiff:
Kinzie Gene Noordman
Respondent:
James E Tilton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Walker v. CA Dept of Corrections & Rehabilitation, et al
as 2:2009cv00569
Plaintiff:
K. Jamel Walker
Defendant:
Gabriella Nunez, D. Anaya, G. Chavarria and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Nathan Spencer v. Bill Lockyer, et al
as 09-55285
Petitioner - Appellant:
NATHAN SPENCER
Respondent - Appellee:
BILL LOCKYER and JAMES E. TILTON
Richard Atencio v. James E Tilton
as 2:2009cv01286
Petitioner:
Richard Atencio
Respondent:
James E Tilton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Terry Evans v. James Tilton, et al
as 09-55265
Petitioner - Appellant:
TERRY DON EVANS
Respondent - Appellee:
JAMES E. TILTON, Secretary CDCR, V. M. ALMAGER, Warden and EDMUND G. BROWN, JR.
Raymond Ramirez v. Cal Terhune, et al
as 09-55227
Petitioner - Appellant:
RAYMOND RAMIREZ
Respondent - Appellee:
CAL TERHUNE, Director of California Department of Corrections, BILL LOCKYER, Attorney General, Attorney General of the State of California and JAMES E. TILTON
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.
