Cases 41 - 50 of 228
Rivera v. Nines et al
as 1:2023cv00986
Petitioner:
Jaime A. Rivera
Respondent:
Jeff Nines and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jimenez v. Warden Bailey et al
as 1:2023cv00909
Petitioner:
Idraxion Jimenez
Respondent:
Warden Bailey and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00880
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00879
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Longstreet v. Nines et al
as 1:2023cv00760
Petitioner:
Wysan R. Longstreet
Respondent:
Jeff Nines and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cannon v. Nines et al
as 1:2023cv00722
Petitioner:
Rodrick D. Cannon
Respondent:
Warden Jeff Nines and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kenneth Kelley v. William Bohrer
as 23-6179
Petitioner:
KENNETH KELLEY
Respondent:
WILLIAM S. BOHRER, Acting Warden and MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL
Nealy v. Warden of MCTC et al
as 1:2023cv00467
Petitioner:
Michael Nealy
Respondent:
Warden of MCTC and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ronald Cox v. Ronald Weber
as 23-6044
Petitioner / Appellant:
RONALD COX
Respondent / Appellee:
WARDEN ALLEN GANG, MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL, WARDEN RONALD S. WEBER and others
Peter Gakuba v. Maryland Attorney General's Office
as 23-6012
Petitioner / Appellant:
PETER GAKUBA
Respondent / Appellee:
MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
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.
