Cases 91 - 100 of 381
SHANNON v. KNIGHT
as 1:2017cv00138
Respondent:
STANLEY KNIGHT
Petitioner:
MARK A. SHANNON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SHANNON v. KNIGHT
as 1:2017cv00139
Respondent:
STANLEY KNIGHT
Petitioner:
MARK A. SHANNON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SHANNON v. KNIGHT
as 1:2017cv00099
Respondent:
STANLEY KNIGHT
Petitioner:
MARK A. SHANNON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SHANNON v. KNIGHT
as 1:2017cv00079
Respondent:
STANLEY KNIGHT
Miscellaneou:
PLAINFIELD CF (Court Use Only)
Petitioner:
MARK A. SHANNON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
VANCLEAVE v. KNIGHT
as 1:2017cv00040
Respondent:
STANLEY KNIGHT
Petitioner:
GREGORY VANCLEAVE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
VANCLEAVE v. BUGHER et al
as 1:2017cv00039
Respondent:
ROBERT BUGHER, GAGNON, STANLEY KNIGHT and others
Petitioner:
GREGORY VANCLEAVE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
AVERITTE v. BUGHER et al
as 1:2016cv03502
Petitioner:
DERRICK AVERITTE
Respondent:
ROBERT BUGHER, K. HARTZELL, STANLEY KNIGHT and others
Miscellaneou:
PLAINFIELD CF (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
MERRITT v. WIEMER ET AL
as 1:2016cv02927
Defendant:
LOTOYA CHERRY, SERGEANT HOSKING, STANLEY KNIGHT and others
Plaintiff:
OMAR MERRITT
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Merritt v. Wiemer et al
as 3:2016cv00728
Plaintiff:
Omar Merritt
Defendant:
Officer A Wiemer, Putnamville Correctional Facility, Bruce Lemmon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
HAINES v. KNIGHT
as 1:2016cv02742
Petitioner:
JAREL T. HAINES
Respondent:
STANLEY KNIGHT
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.
