Cases 1 - 10 of 16
Heslen v. Peters et al
as 3:2022cv00508
Plaintiff:
Nicolette Dawn Heslen
Defendant:
Colette Peters, Brian Belleque, Heidi Steward and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas v. Brown et al
as 6:2021cv00568
Defendant:
Kate Brown and Kate Hendricks
Plaintiff:
Donald Franklin Thomas, III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Albrecht et al v. Oregon Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2021cv00196
Plaintiff:
Daniel Fowler, Toren Pruden, Charles Withrow and others
Defendant:
Sue Washburn, Paula Myers, Ken Jeske and others
Petitioner:
Miles Erb, Leroy Lamont Wells and Serafin Pahua-Pahua
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Uhl v. Premo
as 6:2018cv01123
Respondent:
Jeff Premo
Petitioner:
Franklin Stone Uhl, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Ellison v. USA
as 6:2015cv01839
Petitioner:
Charles Franklin Ellison
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Glasscock v. Taylor
as 2:2014cv00016
Petitioner:
Charles Franklin Glasscock
503) 326-5524 (fax:
Steven T. Wax
Respondent:
Jeri Taylor
503) 947-4794 (fax:
Lynn David Larsen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lefever v. Angelozzi
as 3:2013cv00918
Respondent:
Mr. Rick Angelozzi
Petitioner:
Franklin Carl Lefever
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Franklin v. Oregon Department of Corrections et al
as 2:2013cv00780
Plaintiff:
Brian Keith Franklin
Defendant:
Oregon Correctional Enterpise and Oregon Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Munoz v. Thomas
as 3:2010cv00407
Petitioner:
Roy Franklin Munoz
Respondent:
J. E. Thomas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Franklin -vs- Nooth
as 3:2009cv00939
Petitioner:
Daniel Paul Franklin
Respondent:
Mark Nooth
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.
