Cases 11 - 20 of 35
Danasiri Ratnaweera v. Attorney General of State of California et al
as 2:2008cv03926
Petitioner:
Danasiri Ratnaweera
Respondent:
Attorney General of State of California, Superior Court, District Attorney and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gomez v. Sisto et al
as 2:2008cv01317
Petitioner:
Fredy L Gomez
Respondent:
D. K. Sisto and Attorney General for State of California
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Proffitt v. Martel et al
as 2:2008cv01286
Petitioner:
Jerry Daniel Proffitt
Respondent:
Michael Martel and Attorney General for State of California
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Dominguez v. Sisto et al
as 2:2008cv01026
Petitioner:
Paul Dominguez
Respondent:
D. K. Sisto and Attorney General of State of California
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Williams v. Martel, et al.,
as 2:2008cv01024
Petitioner:
Melvin E. Williams
Respondent:
Michael Martel and Attorney General of State of California
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Townsend v. Sisto et al
as 2:2008cv00923
Petitioner:
William Townsend
Respondent:
D. K. Sisto and Attorney General for State of California
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Maas v. Tilton et al
as 2:2008cv00852
Petitioner:
Merlyn Eugene Maas
Respondent:
James E. Tilton and Attorney General of State of California
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Lancaster v. Kane et al
as 3:2008cv01880
Petitioner:
David Lancaster
Respondent:
A. P. Kane and Attorney General for State of California
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Atherton v. US District Court, et al
as 2:2008cv00555
Petitioner:
William May Atherton
Respondent:
United State District Court and Attorney General of State of California
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Paradela v. Subia et al
as 2:2007cv02757
Petitioner:
Loreto Paradela, Jr
Respondent:
R Subia and Attorney General for State of California
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.
