Cases 1 - 10 of 96
Williams v. Fisher
as 3:2024cv00650
Petitioner:
Tommy Lee Williams
Respondent:
Raythel Fisher
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Esequiel Garcia v. Neil McDowell, et al
as 23-15587
Petitioner / Appellant:
ESEQUIEL GARCIA
Respondent / Appellee:
NEIL MCDOWELL, Warden and RAYTHEL FISHER, Warden
Scott v. Fisher
as 22-1764
Petitioner:
THOMAS CHARLES SCOTT
Respondent:
LANDON BIRD, WARDEN and RAYTHEL FISHER, WARDEN
Williams v. Fisher
as 3:2023cv00423
Petitioner:
Tommy Lee Williams
Respondent:
Raythel Fisher
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Nathaniel Gann v. Valley State Prison, et al
as 22-16862
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NATHANIEL MARCUS GANN
Defendant / Appellee:
VALLEY STATE PRISON, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATEWIDE RELIGIOUS REVIEW COMMITTEE, J. KNIGHT, Appeals Examiner at the Office of Appeals (CDCR) and others
Briseno v. Fisher
as 22-1103
Petitioner:
MICHAEL WESLEY BRISENO
Respondent:
RAYTHEL FISHER, WARDEN and LANDON BIRD, WARDEN
(PC) Martin v. Sisidio, et al.
as 1:2022cv00860
Plaintiff:
Jared Andrew Martin
Defendant:
Sisidio, Raythel Fisher, City of Chowchilla and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Martin v. Fisher et al
as 1:2022cv00847
Plaintiff:
Jared Andrew Martin
Defendant:
Raythel Fisher, N. Salas, County of Madera and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Martin v. Jarrett et al
as 1:2022cv00766
Plaintiff:
Jared Andrew Martin
Defendant:
T. Jarrett, Raythel Fisher, County of Madera and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(PC) Martin v. Huckabay et al
as 1:2022cv00749
Plaintiff:
Jared Andrew Martin
Defendant:
Darren Huckabay, Raythel Fisher, County of Madera 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.
