Cases 41 - 50 of 83
Evett v. Kulongoski et al
as 2:2012cv01585
Defendant:
Debbie Allen, Troy Bowser, Randy Briones and others
Plaintiff:
Richard Eugene Evett
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dent v. Franke
as 3:2012cv01452
Petitioner:
Barry Richard Dent
Respondent:
Steve Franke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gonzalez-Aguilera v. Franke
as 2:2012cv01438
Respondent:
Steve Franke
Petitioner:
C. Michael Gonzalez-Aguilera
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pittman v. Franke
as 2:2012cv01268
Respondent:
Steve Franke
Petitioner:
Darius Pittman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Machic v. Franke
as 2:2012cv01018
Respondent:
Steve Franke
503) 947-4794 (fax:
Lynn David Larsen
Petitioner:
Diego Siquina Machic
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Zurita-Loeza v. Franke
as 2:2012cv00976
Respondent:
Steve Franke
503) 947-4794 (fax:
Lynn David Larsen
Petitioner:
Leonel Zurita-Loeza
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Neubarth v. Oregon dept of Corrections et al
as 2:2012cv00793
Defendant:
B.H.S., Steve Franke, Teresa Henry and others
Plaintiff:
Eugene Curtis Neubarth
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sheldone v. Franke
as 2:2012cv00494
Respondent:
Steve Franke
503) 947-4794 (fax:
Lynn David Larsen
Petitioner:
Frank Sheldone
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dent v. Franke
as 2:2012cv00389
Petitioner:
Barry Richard Dent
503) 326-5524 (fax:
Steven T. Wax
Respondent:
Steve Franke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lamb v. Franke et al
as 2:2012cv00367
Defendant:
Sgt. Enriquez, Steve Franke, Lieutenant Tackett and others
Plaintiff:
Lee Gordon Lamb
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
