Cases 1 - 10 of 208
Whitefield v. Executive Director, et al
as 24-1185
Plaintiff:
SCOTT WHITEFIELD
Defendant:
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and THE STATE OF COLORADO
Johnson v. Stancil, et al
as 24-1180
Petitioner:
DERRICK JOHNSON
Respondent:
ANDRE STANCIL, Executive Director, Colorado Department of Corrections, JENNIFER HANSEN, Warden Colorado Territorial Correction Facility and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
Williams v. Stancil
as 24-1168
Petitioner:
NORMAN WILLIAMS
Respondent:
ANDRE STANCIL, Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections,
Hammock v. Stancil, et al
as 24-1103
Petitioner:
KEITH D. HAMMOCK
Respondent:
MOSES STANCIL, Executive Director of Colorado Department of Corrections and BARRY GOODRICH, Warden, Crowley County Correctional Institution
In re: Brooks
as 23-1247
Petitioner:
In re: BILL JOE BROOKS
Respondent:
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Santistevan v. Williams, et al
as 23-1193
Petitioner / Appellant:
ROBERTO F. SANTISTEVAN
Respondent / Appellee:
DEAN WILLIAMS, Executive Director Colorado Department of Corrections and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-1063
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
McDonald v. Colorado Department of Corrections, et al
as 23-1066
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NICHOLAS JOHN MCDONALD
Defendant / Appellee:
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and TIME COMPUTATION
Santistevan v. Williams, et al
as 23-1053
Petitioner / Appellant:
ROBERTO F. SANTISTEVAN
Respondent / Appellee:
DEAN WILLIAMS, Executive Director Colorado Department of Corrections and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
Ueding v. Colorado Department of Corrections, et al
as 22-1417
Petitioner / Appellant:
KENNETH UEDING
Respondent / Appellee:
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
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.
