Cases 1 - 10 of 347
Taiwan Orran Reed v. Tammy L. Campbell
as 5:2024cv00796
Petitioner:
Taiwan Orran Reed
Respondent:
Tammy L. Campbell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Derwin Jules Jackson v. T.L. Campbell
as 5:2024cv00754
Petitioner:
Derwin Jules Jackson
Respondent:
T. L. Campbell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(HC) Saenz v. Campbell
as 1:2024cv00395
Petitioner:
Robert G. Saenz
Respondent:
T. Campbell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hildebrand v. Campbell
as 5:2024cv01791
Petitioner:
Michael Hildebrand
Respondent:
Trisha Campbell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Walter Reginald Beasley, Jr. v. Tammy L. Campbell
as 5:2024cv00559
Petitioner:
Walter Reginald Beasley, Jr.
Respondent:
Tammy L. Campbell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Campbell v. Matterson
as 4:2024cv01464
Petitioner:
Anthony Tyrone Campbell
Respondent:
Giselle Matterson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(PC)Tsetse v. Campbell
as 1:2024cv00275
Plaintiff:
Prince Franklin Tsetse
Defendant:
Tammy Campbell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Ramirez v. Campbell, et al.
as 1:2024cv00273
Plaintiff:
Saul Miranda Ramirez
Defendant:
Tammy Campbell, E. McDaniel, Mehta Anand and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Eric L. Wright v. Tammy Campbel
as 2:2024cv01658
Petitioner:
Eric L Wright
Respondent:
Tammy Campbel
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thompson v. RJD CF Warden et al
as 3:2024cv00357
Plaintiff:
David A. Thompson
Defendant:
RJD CF Warden, James S. Hill, L. Schobelock and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr 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.
