Cases 41 - 50 of 353
John Harold Ives v. M. Gamboa
as 2:2022cv06859
Petitioner:
John Harold Ives
Respondent:
M. Gamboa
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
(PC) Young v. Clark et al
as 1:2022cv01219
Plaintiff:
Tyrone Powell Young
Defendant:
Ken Clark, M. Gamboa, Galleger and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Young v. Clark et al
as 2:2022cv01646
Plaintiff:
Tyrone Powell Young
Defendant:
Ken Clark, M. Gamboa, Galleger and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
R.V. Coleman v. R.C. Johnson et al
as 2:2022cv05977
Plaintiff:
R. V. Coleman
Defendant:
R. C. Johnson, J. Knight, M. Fordham and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Hill v. Cross et al
as 2:2022cv01464
Plaintiff:
Cymeyon Hill
Defendant:
Ada R. Cross, Counselor Contreas, P. Sahota and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Carlos Hernandez v. M. Gamboa et al
as 5:2022cv01371
Petitioner:
Carlos Hernandez
Respondent:
M. Gamboa and Attorney General Rob Bonta
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dixon v. Partida et al
as 4:2022cv04461
Plaintiff:
Bruce M Dixon
Defendant:
Ms. Partida, L. Gamboa, I Mondragon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hernandez v. Gamboa et al
as 3:2022cv01106
Petitioner:
Carlos Hernandez
Respondent:
M. Gamboa and Rob Bonta
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hernandez v. Gamboa et al
as 3:2022cv01111
Petitioner:
Carlos Hernandez
Respondent:
M. Gamboa and Rob Bonta
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hill v. Cross et al
as 4:2022cv04196
Plaintiff:
Cymeyon Hill
Defendant:
Ada R. Cross, Counselor Contreas, P. Sahota 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.
