Cases 1 - 10 of 80
Emanger Gilbert v. Warden, et al
as 24-10858
Petitioner:
EMANGER L. GILBERT
Defendant:
WARDEN and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA
Michael Stovall v. Hamilton A & I Warden, et al
as 23-14130
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL LEON STOVALL
Respondent:
HAMILTON A & I WARDEN and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA
In re: Matthew Phillips
as 23-13163
Petitioner:
In re: MATTHEW SHERMAN PHILLIPS
Respondent:
GOVERNOR OF ALABAMA, COMMISSIONER, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, WARDEN and others
Donnie ShropshireIn re: Donnie Shropshire
as 23-11422
Petitioner:
In re: DONNIE SHROPSHIRE
Respondent:
WARDEN III and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA
Matthew Phillips v. Governor of the State of Alabama, et al
as 22-13549
Petitioner / Appellant:
MATTHEW SHERMAN PHILLIPS
Respondent / Appellee:
GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA, COMMISSIONER, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, WARDEN and others
Reed Knight v. Warden, et al
as 22-13415
Petitioner / Appellant:
REED MAX KNIGHT
Respondent / Appellee:
WARDEN and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA
In re: Neil Walker
as 22-13302
Petitioner:
In re: NEIL WALKER
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA
Robert Baise, Jr. v. Limestone CF Warden, et al
as 22-13201
Petitioner / Appellant:
ROBERT BAISE, JR.
Respondent / Appellee:
LIMESTONE CF WARDEN and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA, THE
Michael Duncan v. Alabama Department of Corrections, et al
as 22-13108
Petitioner / Appellant:
MICHAEL LAWRENCE DUNCAN
Respondent / Appellee:
ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA
Thomas McMeans v. Attorney General of the State of Alabama, et al
as 22-12784
Petitioner / Appellant:
THOMAS KENYON MCMEANS
Respondent / Appellee:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA, COMMISSIONER, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA and others
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.
