Cases 31 - 40 of 98
Mickle v. Brown, et al
as 3:1992cv02951
Plaintiff:
Denny Mickle
Miscellaneou:
California Appellate Project and Habeas Corpus Resource Center
Defendant:
Jill Brown
3rd_party_defendant:
Robert L. Ayers
Respondent:
Robert L. Ayers and Robert K. Wong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Reed v. Wong
as 3:2010cv00469
Plaintiff:
Tyrone Lamont Reed
Defendant:
Robert K. Wong
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Spencer Brasure v. Robert Wong
as 10-55152
Petitioner - Appellant:
SPENCER RAWLINS BRASURE
Respondent - Appellee:
ROBERT K. WONG, Warden, San Quentin State Prison
Daniels v. Wong
as 3:2010cv00415
Petitioner:
Louis Charles Daniels
Respondent:
Robert K. Wong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Douglas Stankewitz v. Robert Wong
as 10-99001
Petitioner - Appellee:
DOUGLAS RAY STANKEWITZ
Respondent - Appellant:
ROBERT K. WONG
Howard v. Woodford, et al
as 1:1993cv05726
Petitioner:
Albert Cecil Howard
Respondent:
Robert K. Wong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Ashmus v. Ayers
as 3:1993cv00594
Petitioner:
Troy Adam Ashmus
Miscellaneou:
California Appellate Project
Respondent:
Robert L. Ayers, Jr. , Robert K. Wong and Vincent Cullen
Plaintiff:
Robert K. Wong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
Blair v. Wong
as 5:2009cv06048
Petitioner:
John Blair
Defendant:
Robert K. Wong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bode v. Wong
as 3:2009cv05848
Petitioner:
Clifton A. Bode
Respondent:
Robert K. Wong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Losno v. Wong
as 3:2009cv05475
Petitioner:
Rafael Alberto Losno
Respondent:
Robert K. Wong
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.
