Cases 1 - 10 of 155
Singleton v. United States Of America
as 4:2024cv00089
Petitioner:
Arthur Singleton
Respondent:
United States Of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
McPherson v. Benedict et al
as 6:2024cv00020
Plaintiff:
Brentrez Jarmykus McPherson and Royal Great Levi King - Chief Levi Priest Yaheshiah
Defendant:
Pope Benedict, Department of Corrections, Georgia Dept. of Corrections and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bussey v. Pineiro
as 3:2023cv00239
Petitioner:
Arthur Shermaine Bussey
Respondent:
Warden Aaron Pineiro
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BREWSTER v. SMITH
as 4:2023cv00165
Plaintiff:
GEORGE WALTER BREWSTER, III
Defendant:
Judge ARTHUR L SMITH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Johnson v. United States of America
as 1:2023cv03924
Petitioner:
Arthur Antonio Johnson
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
BUSSEY v. BOBBITT
as 3:2023cv00151
Petitioner:
Arthur Shermaine Bussey
Respondent:
WARDEN BOBBITT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BUSSEY v. BOBBITT
as 5:2023cv00273
Petitioner:
ARTHUR SHERMAINE BUSSEY
Respondent:
WARDEN BOBBITT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
BREWSTER v. SMITH et al
as 4:2023cv00092
Plaintiff:
GEORGE WALTER BREWSTER, III
Defendant:
Judge WILLIAM SMITH and JUDGE ARTHUR L SMITH, III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
REID v. USA
as 5:2023cv00124
Petitioner:
ARTHUR GERALD REID
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Fedd v. Odum
as 5:2023cv00002
Plaintiff:
Levi Arthur Fedd
Defendant:
Roy Odum
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.
