Cases 31 - 40 of 190
PARKS v. CAPOZZA et al
as 2:2020cv04532
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT MARK CAPOZZA, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA
Petitioner:
EVANS PARKS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
REAVIS v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2020cv01284
Respondent:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, CENTRAL OFFICE, SUPERINTENDENT THOMAS MCGINLEY and others
Petitioner:
ACEY REAVIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Lozano-Garcia v. Capozza et al
as 1:2020cv01574
Petitioner:
Oscar Lozano-Garcia
Respondent:
Mark Capozza, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE/COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA and Luzerne County District Attorney's Office
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
GOODMAN v. MICELI et al
as 2:2020cv01259
Defendant:
ERIC T. ARMEL, BETH RUDZIEMSKI, D. VARNER and others
Plaintiff:
JERMAINE I. GOODMAN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
HOLLOWAY v. CAPOZZA et al
as 2:2020cv03952
Respondent:
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, MARK CAPOZZA and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Petitioner:
DAVID VALDEZ HOLLOWAY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
SMITH v. CAPOZZA
as 2:2020cv03191
Petitioner:
WAYNE T. SMITH
Respondent:
MARK CAPOZZA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
BROOKS v. CAPOZZA et al
as 2:2020cv02885
Respondent:
MARK CAPOZZA, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF FAYETTE
Petitioner:
JAMES BROOKS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
WILLIAMS v. THE PA. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 2:2020cv00794
Defendant:
MR. KNEPPER, THE PA. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, C.O. 1 BAGAN and others
Plaintiff:
CHARLES WILLIAMS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
WEIMER v. CAPOZZA
as 2:2020cv00781
Petitioner:
PAUL DAVID WEIMER
Respondent:
MARK CAPOZZA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
WILLIAMS v. WETZEL et al
as 2:2020cv00663
Defendant:
JANE DOE, JOHN WETZEL, JOHN/JANE DOE'S and others
Plaintiff:
RASHAD WILLIAMS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
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.
