Cases 41 - 50 of 662
Johnson v. Slave-Noose et al
as 3:2022cv00290
Plaintiff:
Lausteveion Johnson
Defendant:
Slave-Noose, J Claudid-Bil, Lance White and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Medina v. CDCR et al
as 1:2022cv00764
Plaintiff:
Cesario Vizcarra Medina
Defendant:
CDCR, Connie Gipson and Ken Clark
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Medina v. Graham et al
as 6:2022cv00041
Plaintiff:
Jimmy Lee Medina
Defendant:
Arron Graham, Jim Salmonsen, Thomas Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00692
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
(PC)Valencia v. Medina et al
as 1:2022cv00569
Plaintiff:
Christopher G. Valencia
Defendant:
Medina and Ken Clark
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Cotton v. Medina et al
as 1:2022cv00568
Plaintiff:
Wesley Cotton
Defendant:
Sgt. Medina and Ken Clark
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Meyers v. Kernan et al
as 1:2022cv00539
Plaintiff:
Leon Lee Meyers
Defendant:
Scott Kernan, K. Allison, R. Gamboa and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Marco Aguilar-Medina v. David Shinn, et al
as 22-15653
Petitioner / Appellant:
MARCO ANTONIO AGUILAR-MEDINA
Respondent / Appellee:
DAVID SHINN, Director and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA
United States of America v. Lacap, Jr.
as 3:2022cv00082
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Cloyd Harley Medina Lacap, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
(PC) Alley v. Saelee et al
as 2:2022cv00661
Plaintiff:
Rodger Alley
Defendant:
Allen Saelee, Randy Denniston, Jorge Estupinan 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.
