Cases 1 - 10 of 65
ASH v. OLIVER et al
as 5:2024cv00021
Plaintiff:
JABBARI KEYON ASH, SR
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER TYRONE OLIVER and WARDEN SCOTT WILKES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PATTERSON v. WILKES
as 5:2023cv00267
Petitioner:
DANIEL RAY PATTERSON
Defendant:
WARDEN SCOTT WILKES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Martin v. Wilkes
as 1:2023cv01998
Petitioner:
Marvin Martin
Respondent:
Scott Wilkes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Leonard v. Wilkes
as 1:2023cv01233
Petitioner:
Sentavious Leonard
Defendant:
Scott Wilkes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Leonard v. Scottwilkes
as 1:2023cv01199
Petitioner:
Sentavious Leonard
Respondent:
Warden Scottwilkes and Warden Scott Wilkes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
STAPLES v. OLIVER et al
as 5:2023cv00068
Plaintiff:
PHILLIP RANDY STAPLES
Defendant:
Commissioner TYRONE OLIVER, Warden SCOTT WILKES, WELLPATH LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
STAPLES v. OLIVER et al
as 5:2023cv00067
Plaintiff:
PHILLIP RANDY STAPLES
Defendant:
TYRONE OLIVER, SCOTT WILKES, WELLPATH LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Limpin v. State of California et al
as 3:2023cv00037
Plaintiff:
Melchor Karl T. Limpin
Defendant:
State of California, Gavin Newsom, Toni G. Atkins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cv Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Salahuddin v. Wilkes et al
as 1:2022cv05163
Petitioner:
Autley I. Salahuddin, II
Respondent:
Warden Scott Wilkes and The Attorney General of the State of Georgia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gordon v. Wilkes
as 1:2022cv03102
Petitioner:
Merease Gordon
Respondent:
Warden Scott Wilkes
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.
