Cases 41 - 50 of 114
Adam Bickham v. Robert Stevenson
as 16-6530
Petitioner - Appellant:
ADAM BICKHAM
Respondent - Appellee:
ROBERT STEVENSON, Warden Broad River Correctional Institution
Gambrell v. SC, State of
as 2:2016cv00640
Petitioner:
Johnny Ray Gambrell
Respondent:
Warden Broad River Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
James Russell v. Warden of Broad River Prison
as 16-6204
Petitioner - Appellant:
JAMES RUSSELL
Respondent - Appellee:
WARDEN, BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Jonothan Vick v. Warden, Broad River Corr Inst
as 15-7451
Petitioner - Appellant:
JONOTHAN CHRISTIAN VICK
Respondent - Appellee:
WARDEN, BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Respondent:
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Frederick Irby v. Warden
as 15-6736
Petitioner - Appellant:
FREDERICK ALPHONSODEMETRE IRBY
Respondent - Appellee:
WARDEN, Broad River Correctional Institution
Respondent:
SOUTH CAROLINA
Johnny Gambrell v. SC
as 15-6392
Petitioner - Appellant:
JOHNNY RAY GAMBRELL
Respondent - Appellee:
SC, STATE OF and WARDEN, BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Robert Miller, Jr. v. Warden BRCI
as 15-6349
Petitioner - Appellant:
ROBERT JAMES MILLER, JR.
Respondent - Appellee:
WARDEN, BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Respondent:
BRIAN P. STIRLING, Director South Carolina Department of Corrections
Bland v. South Carolina Department of Corrections
as 2:2014cv04866
Petitioner:
Otis Bland
Respondent:
Warden Broad River Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Vick v. South Carolina, State of
as 0:2014cv03180
Petitioner:
Jonothan Christian Vick
Respondent:
Warden Broad River Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Terrance Adams v. Robert Stevenson, III
as 14-6197
Petitioner - Appellant:
TERRANCE ADAMS
Respondent - Appellee:
ROBERT M. STEVENSON, III, Warden Broad River Correctional Institution
Respondent:
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
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.
