Cases 1 - 10 of 38
Robertson v. Illinois Prisoner Review Board
as 2:2024cv02067
Petitioner:
Wesley M Robertson
Defendant:
Illinois Prisoner Review Board
Not Yet Classified:
Habeas Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Robertson v. David Paul
as 5:2024cv00056
Petitioner:
Demetrius M. Robertson
Respondent:
David Paul
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Robertson v. Paul
as 5:2024cv00027
Plaintiff:
Demetrius M. Robertson
Respondent:
Warden David Paul
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Campos v. TDCJ French M. Robertson Unit
as 1:2023cv00191
Plaintiff:
Carlos Campos
Defendant:
TDCJ French M. Robertson Unit
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Andre Love v. J. Robertson
as 23-55660
Petitioner / Appellant:
ANDRE TERIAL LOVE
Respondent / Appellee:
J. M. ROBERTSON
Herbert Cornejo Mendez v. Jim M. Robertson
as 5:2023cv00734
Petitioner:
Herbert Cornejo Mendez
Respondent:
Jim M. Robertson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Herbert Cornejo Mendez v. Jim M. Robertson
as 5:2023cv00732
Petitioner:
Herbert Cornejo Mendez
Respondent:
Jim M. Robertson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Andre Terial Love v. J. M. Robertson
as 2:2022cv00977
Petitioner:
Andre Terial Love
Respondent:
J M Robertson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Robertson v. Luve et al
as 3:2021cv00347
Plaintiff:
Travis M Robertson
Defendant:
Stoney Luve, Sgt. Katie Wilson, Lt. Mallory Campbell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Robertson v. Clark et al
as 1:2021cv00668
Respondent:
Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office, Bryan Clark and Fran Chardo
Petitioner:
Kashif M. Robertson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
