Cases 1 - 10 of 11
PRESSLEY v. UNITED STATES COURT et al
as 1:2022cv00907
Petitioner:
Dalacey Pressley
Respondent:
United States Court and The Attorney General of the State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dalacey Pressley v. Danville State Hospital
as 22-1886
Petitioner:
DALACEY PRESSLEY
Respondent:
DANVILLE STATE HOSPITAL
PRESSLEY v. UNITED STATES COURT et al
as 2:2022cv01791
Petitioner:
DALACEY PRESSLEY
Respondent:
UNITED STATES COURT and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pressley v. United States of America et al
as 1:2021cv01285
Petitioner:
Dalacey Pressley
Respondent:
United States of America and Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Pressley v. USA
as 1:2018cv02280
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Dalacey Pressley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
PRESSLEY v. SCI AT DALLAS et al
as 2:2013cv04857
Plaintiff:
DALACEY PRESSLEY
Defendant:
SCI AT DALLAS, LUZERNE COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY and NORRISTOWN STATE HOSPITAL
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Pressley v. SCI at Dallas et al
as 1:2013cv02021
Plaintiff:
Dalacey Pressley
Defendant:
SCI at Dallas, Luzerne County Correctional Facility and Norristown State Hospital
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Pressley v. USA
as 1:2013cv01910
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Dalacey Pressley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Pressley v. USA
as 1:2013cv01293
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Dalacey Pressley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Pressley v. Commonwealth PA et al
as 3:2010cv00297
Petitioner:
Dalacey Pressley
Respondent:
SCI - Dallas, PA State Attorney General and Commonwealth PA
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.
