Cases 1 - 10 of 13
MOULTRIE v. KELLY et al
as 3:2021cv04036
Defendant:
CHARLES LEE MOULTRIE, JR, PATRICIA D KELLY and JOHN A FOX
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MOULTRIE v. PENSACOLA POLICE DEPARTMENT
as 3:2021cv01052
Plaintiff:
CHARLES LEE MOULTRIE, JR
Defendant:
PENSACOLA POLICE DEPARTMENT and PATRICK D KELLY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smeko v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 5:2019cv00480
Petitioner:
Charles Lee Semko
Respondent:
Florida Attorney General and Secretary, Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Hill v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al (Sarasota County)
as 8:2018cv01446
Petitioner:
Charles Lee Hill, Jr.
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Attorney General, State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Glover v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 8:2018cv00328
Petitioner:
Charles Lee Glover
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and 13th Judicial Circuit Clerk of the Court
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Lee v. United States of America et al
as 5:2017cv00198
Plaintiff:
Timothy Charles Lee
Defendant:
United States of America and Mark Tidwell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346
McCray v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al
as 5:2014cv00272
Petitioner:
Charles Lee McCray
Respondent:
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Florida Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Lee v. USA
as 8:2014cv00719
Plaintiff:
Raymond Charles Lee
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
BREITENSTEIN et al v. DARNELL
as 1:2011cv00242
Plaintiff:
ROBERT S BREITENSTEIN and MICHAEL L JAMES
Defendant:
SADIE DARNELL, CHARLES LEE, TONAKA GATES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MCCOY v ATKINSON
as 5:2009cv00281
Petitioner:
CHARLES LEE MCCOY
Respondent:
KENNY ATKINSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
