Cases 21 - 30 of 41
Angel Gutierrez v. R. Subia
as 08-56106
Petitioner - Appellant:
ANGEL ANDREW GUTIERREZ
Respondent - Appellee:
R. SUBIA, Warden
Young v. Subia
as 4:2008cv01481
Petitioner:
Emmett Young, Jr.
Respondent:
R. Subia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Washington v. Mohammed et al
as 2:2008cv00386
Plaintiff:
John Washington
Defendant:
Salem Mohammed, J. Tilton, R Subia and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas Norris v. J R Subia
as 2:2008cv00475
Petitioner:
Thomas Fredrick Norris
Respondent:
J R Subia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Paradela v. Subia et al
as 2:2007cv02757
Petitioner:
Loreto Paradela, Jr
Respondent:
R Subia and Attorney General for State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rodriguez v. Swarzenegger et al
as 2:2007cv02531
Plaintiff:
Luis Valenzuela Rodriguez
Defendant:
Arnold Swarzenegger, Mike Knowles, J. Woodford and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Howell v. Subia et al
as 1:2007cv01738
Petitioner:
Steven Vincent Howell
Respondent:
R. Subia and Attorney General of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Howell v. Subia et al
as 2:2007cv02484
Petitioner:
Steven Vincent Howell
Respondent:
R. Subia and Attorney General of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rollo v. Subia et al
as 2:2007cv02421
Petitioner:
Gary Rollo
Respondent:
R Subia and Attorney General CA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Alfred Scott v. J R Subia
as 2:2007cv05244
Petitioner:
Alfred Scott
Respondent:
J R Subia
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.
