Cases 1 - 10 of 16
Fidel Goni v. Attorney General for the State, et al
as 18-55011
Petitioner - Appellant:
FIDEL PEREZ GONI
Respondent - Appellee:
ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA and BARRY REDDISH
Fidel Perez Goni v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
as 2:2017cv04540
Respondent:
Attorney General of California, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and Warden Of Florida St Barry Reddish
Petitioner:
Fidel Perez Goni
PEREZ GONI v. STATE OF FLORIDA et al
as 1:2015cv24607
Petitioner:
FIDEL PEREZ GONI
Respondent:
State of Florida
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
In re: Fidel Goni
as 15-14212
Petitioner:
In re: FIDEL PEREZ GONI
Successive Habeas Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
PEREZ GONI v. STATE OF FLORIDA et al
as 3:2015cv00404
Petitioner:
FIDEL PEREZ GONI
Respondent:
STATE OF FLORIDA and DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
GONI v. STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 1:2015cv23331
Petitioner:
FIDEL PEREZ GONI
Respondent:
State of Florida Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
GONI v. STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
as 5:2015cv00231
Petitioner:
FIDEL PEREZ GONI
Respondent:
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Fidel Goni v. Secretary, Florida DOC
as 10-15110
Petitioner - Appellant:
FIDEL PEREZ GONI
Defendant - Appellee:
SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Goni v. Secretary Florida Department of Corrections
as 1:2010cv20689
Plaintiff:
Fidel Perez Goni
Defendant:
Secretary Florida Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Goni v. Muhammad et al
as 3:2009cv01258
Plaintiff:
Fidel Perez Goni
Defendant:
Akhtar Muhammad, M.D., William F. Mathews, J. Scott Thayer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 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.
