Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Bahena v. Ramirez et al
as 4:2022cv03039
Plaintiff:
Esmeling Bahena
Defendant:
B. Ramirez and Sgt. Navarro
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(HC) Ramirez v. The People of the State of California
as 1:2022cv00604
Plaintiff:
Isaiah B. Ramirez
Defendant:
The People of the State of California
Respondent:
People of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(PC) Esmeling Bahena v. B. Ramirez et al
as 2:2022cv00838
Plaintiff:
Esmeling Bahena
Defendant:
B. Ramirez and Navarro
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ramirez v. The People of the State of California
as 4:2022cv02758
Petitioner:
Isaiah B. Ramirez
Respondent:
The People of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Harris v. Ramirez
as 5:2022cv01568
Plaintiff:
Tevin Lee Harris
Defendant:
B. Ramirez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Bradford v. Lemon et al
as 4:2021cv01165
Plaintiff:
Raymond Alford Bradford
Defendant:
B. Ramirez, City of Monterey, T. Lemon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Alava v. Lamanna et al
as 1:2020cv10276
Defendant:
Toni Antrobus, Amy Lamanna, Benny Thorpe and others
Plaintiff:
Princess Debbie Alava
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Billey Dooley, Jr. v. Kamala Harris, et al
as 14-55367
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BILLEY L. DOOLEY, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
KAMALA D. HARRIS, Attorney General, FRANK DONZANTI, District Attorney, individual capacity, CHARLIE OLIVAS, Riverside Police Officer, individual capacity and others
Billey L Dooley v. Kamela Harris et al
as 5:2013cv01447
Defendant:
Frank Donzanti, Kamela Harris, Charlie Olivas and others
Plaintiff:
Billey L Dooley, Jr
Billey L Dooley Jr v. Rubylyn B Ramirez
as 5:2011cv01200
Plaintiff:
Billey L Dooley, Jr
Defendant:
Rubylyn B Ramirez
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.
