Cases 81 - 90 of 232
Tavon Owens v. Warden of Western Correctional Institution
as 22-6067
Petitioner / Appellant:
TAVON OWENS
Respondent / Appellee:
WARDEN, WESTERN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION and MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL
Gakuba v. Maryland Attorney General's Office
as 1:2022cv00237
Petitioner:
Peter Gakuba
Respondent:
Maryland Attorney General's Office
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Schiff v. Frosh et al
as 1:2022cv00513
Petitioner:
Graham Schiff
Respondent:
Brian Frosh and Maryland Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mark French v. Michael Bivens
as 22-6137
Petitioner / Appellant:
MARK FRENCH
Respondent / Appellee:
OFFICER MICHAEL BIVENS and MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL
Williams v. Maryland Attorney General
as 1:2022cv00075
Petitioner:
Tavon Williams
Respondent:
Maryland Attorney General and Warden Thomas Wolfe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Graham Schiff v. Maryland Attorney General
as 22-6147
Petitioner / Appellant:
GRAHAM HARRY SCHIFF
Respondent / Appellee:
SUSAN MALAGARI and MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL
Edward Witherspoon v. Frank Bishop
as 21-7740
Petitioner / Appellant:
EDWARD WITHERSPOON
Respondent / Appellee:
FRANK B. BISHOP and MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL
Walter McCoy, Jr. v. Maryland Attorney General
as 22-6072
Petitioner / Appellant:
WALTER L. MCCOY, JR.
Respondent / Appellee:
MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL and CHRISTOPHER S. SMITH, Warden
Giddings v. M.C.T.C. et al
as 1:2021cv03189
Petitioner:
Warren Matthew Gidddings and Warren Mathew Giddings
Respondent:
M.C.T.C., Maryland Attorney General and Denise A. Gelsinger
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
John Gray v. Warden of Jessup Correctional Institution
as 21-7695
Petitioner / Appellant:
JOHN GRAY
Respondent / Appellee:
WARDEN OF JESSUP CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION and MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL
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.