Cases 41 - 50 of 66
GUZMAN v. FLOUNOY
as 4:2014cv00254
Plaintiff:
TAMRAL GUZMAN
Defendant:
J FLOUNOY and FCI TALLAHASSEE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hasanati v. Office of Statewide Prosecution et al
as 1:2014cv21243
Plaintiff:
Jahi Amadi Hasanati
Defendant:
Office of Statewide Prosecution, State of Florida, Rick Scott and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Guzman v. Florida Department of Corrections et al
as 9:2014cv80242
Plaintiff:
Jose E. Guzman
Defendant:
Florida Department of Corrections and Florida Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jones v. Galvez et al
as 1:2013cv24624
Plaintiff:
Tom Maurice Jones
Defendant:
Jose Galvez, George Guillen and Silvio Guzman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Guzman-Dearco v. USA
as 8:2013cv01961
Plaintiff:
Raul Antonio Guzman-Dearco
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Guzman v. United States of America
as 8:2013cv01825
Plaintiff:
Roberto Guzman
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Guzman v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 8:2012cv02779
Petitioner:
Valentin Barrera Guzman
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Attorney General, State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
MELENDEZ v. LEVIN, et al
as 4:2012cv00020
Plaintiff:
JUAN MELENDEZ
Defendant:
LEVIN, INCH, ABAD and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
MARTIKEAN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 5:2011cv00343
Plaintiff:
GLENN L MARTIKEAN
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, M CRUZ, NFN BERKEBILE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Guzman v. Santa Rosa CI et al
as 1:2009cv23795
Plaintiff:
Norwin Guzman
Defendant:
Santa Rosa CI and Attorney General State of Florida
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.
