Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 10
MCDONALD v. RANSOM et al
as 2:2022cv00990
Petitioner: SHAWN RAY MCDONALD
Respondent: SUPERINTENDENT KEVIN J. RANSOM, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BEAVER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
McDonald v. Jones
as 22-20169
Plaintiff / Appellant: Richard Ray McDonald
Defendant / Appellee: Devell R. Jones and Olaniran Siyanbola
McDonald v. Jones et al
as 4:2021cv01144
Plaintiff: Richard Ray McDonald
Defendant: Devell R. Jones and Olaniran Siyanbola
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McDonald v. Brown et al
as 1:2019cv02089
Defendant: Shea Brown, Butler and Jimmy Kilgore
Plaintiff: David Alonzo Ray McDonald
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McDonald v. Kilgore We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2019cv01958
Respondent: Jimmy Kilgore
Petitioner: David Alonzo Ray McDonald
Defendant: staff attorney 2
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
McDonald v. Gonzalez et al
as 4:2018cv02936
Plaintiff: Richard Ray McDonald
Defendant: K'Shawn Burwell and Ed Gonzalez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Richard McDonald v. William Stephens, Director
as 14-41322
Petitioner - Appellant: RICHARD RAY MCDONALD
Respondent - Appellee: WILLIAM STEPHENS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
McDonald v. Monroe et al
as 3:2014cv00269
Plaintiff: Richard Ray McDonald
Defendant: Carol E Monroe, Rodolfo Diaz, Heribert Zouetchou and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McDonald v. Stephens
as 3:2014cv00207
Petitioner: Richard Ray McDonald
Respondent: William Stephens
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
McDonald v. Quarterman We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 4:2008cv00709
Petitioner: Richard Ray McDonald
Respondent: Nathaniel Quarterman
Cause Of Action: Federal Question

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.


Why Is My Information Online?