Cases 71 - 80 of 12,068
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00396
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Dawes v. The People of the State of California et al
as 3:2024cv00401
Plaintiff:
William Orren Dawes
Defendant:
The People of the State of California, Rob Bonta, Gavin Newsom and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Wallace v. Montgomery
as 3:2024cv00348
Petitioner:
Nathaniel Wallace
Respondent:
Warren L. Montgomery
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Moran-Munoz v. Garland et al
as 3:2024cv00373
Petitioner:
Javier Moran-Munoz
Respondent:
Merrick Garland, Ronald L. Davis, Alejandro Mayorkas and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00375
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00303
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 st Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Daniels v. USA
as 3:2024cv00384
Petitioner:
Akil Saeed Daniels
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Burnette v. Hixon
as 3:2024cv00231
Petitioner:
Beau Burnette
Respondent:
Kevin Hixon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
TerVeer v. Doe et al
as 3:2024cv00150
Plaintiff:
Justin TerVeer
Defendant:
Doe and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Jackson v. Hill et al
as 3:2024cv00285
Petitioner:
Tim Jackson
Respondent:
J. Hill and Rob Bonta
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.
