Cases 61 - 70 of 313
Boyd v. Lamas
as 9:2013cv01193
Petitioner:
Michael Shane Boyd
Respondent:
Marirosa Lamas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Richard Woods v. Marirosa Lamas, et al
as 13-3751
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICHARD WOODS
Defendant - Appellee:
MARIROSA LAMAS, ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA and DISTRICT ATTORNEY PHILADELPHIA
HARDY v. LAMAS et al
as 2:2013cv01352
Petitioner:
KENNETH M. HARDY, JR.
Respondent:
MARIROSA LAMAS and KATHLEEN KAIN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Piskanin v. Wetzel et al
as 1:2013cv02341
Plaintiff:
Michael John Piskanin
Defendant:
John Wetzel, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, Marirosa Lamas and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Lee Rowland v. Thomas Duran
as 13-3647
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LEE J. ROWLAND
Defendant - Appellee:
THOMAS DURAN, JACKIE MOTTER, HARKEY and others
WHITACRE v. LAMAS
as 2:2013cv01286
Petitioner:
RANDY CLARK WHITACRE
Respondent:
MARIROSA LAMAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
David Wicks v. Kimberly Barkley, et al
as 13-3624
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID BRYANT WICKS
Defendant - Appellee:
KIMBERLY A. BARKLEY, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Probation and Parole, MARIROSA LAMAS, Facility Manager of Rockview, TIM MILLER, Correctional Class & Program Manager of Rockview and others
PRUITT v. LAMAS et al
as 2:2013cv01262
Petitioner:
FRANK PRUITT
Respondent:
MARIROSA LAMAS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
SANTIGAGO v. LAMAS et al
as 5:2013cv05070
Petitioner:
BENJAMIN LEE SANTIAGO
Respondent:
MARIROSA LAMAS and PA STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WILLIAMS v. LAMAS et al
as 2:2013cv01171
Petitioner:
JEFF SCHIRONE WILLIAMS
Respondent:
MARIROSA LAMAS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
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.
