Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Moody v. Hamm et al (INMATE 2)
as 2:2026cv00206
Plaintiff:
Malachi Josephus Moody
Defendant:
John Q. Hamm, Reosha Butler, James Griffin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Campbell v. Davis et al (INMATE 1)
as 1:2026cv00204
Plaintiff:
James Watson Campbell
Defendant:
Gwendolyn Davis and Reosha Butler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Morris v. Butler (INMATE 1)
as 1:2026cv00028
Plaintiff:
Jeremy Chad Morris
Defendant:
Reosha Butler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Nicholas v. Dunn
as 5:2025cv02137
Petitioner:
J.C. Deontae Nicholas
Respondent:
Reosha Butler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hughes v. Butler (INMATE 1)
as 2:2025cv00952
Plaintiff:
Charles Bryant Hughes, Jr.
Defendant:
Reosha Butler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pickle v. Blount County et al
as 2:2025cv01410
Petitioner:
Daniel J. Pickle
Respondent:
Blount County and Reosha Butler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mack v. Calloway et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2025cv00648
Plaintiff:
Quintavious Jamar Mack
Defendant:
Steven T. Marshall and Reosha Butler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Smith v. Butler
as 6:2025cv01049
Petitioner:
Hollis Chadwick Smith
Respondent:
Reosha Butler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mack v. Calloway et al
as 2:2025cv00997
Petitioner:
Quintavious Jamar Mack
Respondent:
Steve Marshall and Reosha Butler
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
McCarroll v. State of Alabama
as 2:2025cv00792
Petitioner:
Raven Symone McCarroll
Respondent:
Reosha Butler
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.
