Cases 11 - 20 of 266
IN RE: EUGENE SMITH
as 2:2022cv04974
Plaintiff:
EUGENE SMITH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davis v. Bechtold et al
as 3:2022cv01822
Plaintiff:
Cody Eugene Davis
Defendant:
William D. Bechtold, Franklin County Jail Records and Franklin County Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
CASH v. USA
as 2:2022cv01699
Petitioner:
DUANE EUGENE CASH, JR.
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
CHERRY, JR. v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2022cv04692
Plaintiff:
KENNETH EUGENE CHERRY, JR.
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
HARRIS v. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ERIE, COUNTY
as 1:2022cv00269
Petitioner:
ALLEN EUGENE HARRIS
Respondent:
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ERIE COUNTY, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ERIE, COUNTY, WARDEN SCI ALBION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SMITH v. ZAKEN et al
as 2:2022cv01523
Petitioner:
MARCUS EUGENE SMITH
Respondent:
MICHAEL ZAKEN, ZAPPALA A. STEPHEN and ATTORNEY GENERAL JOSH SHAPIRO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Davis v. Franklin County Jail et al
as 3:2022cv01307
Plaintiff:
Cody Eugene Davis
Defendant:
Franklin County Jail, Justin Kump, Officer Strend and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nolden v. USA
as 1:2022cv01569
Petitioner:
Charles Eugene Nolden
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Rice v. USA
as 1:2022cv01548
Petitioner:
Eugene Rice
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
STUBBS v. SKREPENAK et al
as 1:2022cv00940
Plaintiff:
Henry Christopher Stubbs, III
Defendant:
Gregory A. Skrepenak, Todd Vonderheid, Stephen A. Urban and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
