Cases 1 - 10 of 19
SHELTON v. PA. BOARD OF PROBATION & PAROLE et al
as 1:2024cv00074
Plaintiff:
NORMAN SHELTON
Defendant:
PA. BOARD OF PROBATION & PAROLE, SUPERINTENDANT MS. THOMSON and TONY SPREARS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Norman Shelton v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, et al
as 24-1203
Plaintiff:
NORMAN SHELTON
Defendant:
PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE and SUPERINTENDENT ALBION SCI
Norman Shelton v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, et al
as 23-2009
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NORMAN SHELTON
Defendant / Appellee:
PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE and SUPERINTENDENT ALBION SCI
SHELTON v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE
as 1:2023cv00100
Petitioner:
NORMAN SHELTON
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE and WARDEN SCI ALBION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SHELTON v. PA BOARD OF PROBATION & PAROLE, et al
as 1:2022cv00287
Petitioner:
NORMAN SHELTON
Respondent:
PA BOARD OF PROBATION & PAROLE and SUPERINTENDENT SCI ALBION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2017cv00764
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 623
SHELTON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2016cv03490
Plaintiff:
NORMAN SHELTON
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
In re: Norman Shelton
as 16-2822
Petitioner:
In re: NORMAN SHELTON
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Norman Shelton v. A. Jordan, et al
as 14-4324
Petitioner - Appellant:
NORMAN SHELTON
Respondent - Appellee:
A. JORDAN, WARDEN LEWISBURG USP, CHAMBERS and others
Norman Shelton v. Baker, et al
as 14-4007
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NORMAN SHELTON
Defendant - Appellee:
DR. BAKER, P.A. FRANCIS FASCIANA, ADMIN BROWN and others
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.
