Cases 1 - 10 of 72
Avist v. Day et al
as 2:2024cv01185
Plaintiff:
Christopher Avist
Defendant:
Travis Day
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Louisiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Anderson v. Day
as 2:2024cv00873
Plaintiff:
Donald Arthur Anderson
Defendant:
Travis Day
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Clark v. Dept of Public Safety
as 24-30201
Plaintiff:
Torriana Clark
Defendant:
Department of Public Safety and Corrections, State of Louisiana, Lance Wallace, Sergeant and Travis Day, Warden
Ross v. Day et al
as 2:2024cv00740
Plaintiff:
Frederick Ross
Defendant:
Travis Day
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Louisiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Crosby v. Day
as 5:2024cv00358
Plaintiff:
Michael Crosby
Defendant:
Travis Day
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bickham v. Day et al
as 1:2024cv00046
Plaintiff:
Tony D. Bickham
Defendant:
Mississippi Department of Correction Probation and Parole, Travis Day and Lynn Fitch
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Diaz vs. Day
as 2:2024cv00325
Plaintiff:
Jared Diaz
Defendant:
Travis Day
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Louisiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Reynolds v. Day
as 24-30016
Petitioner:
Dashone Marcel Reynolds
Respondent:
Travis Day, Warden, B. B. Rayburn Correctional Center and Orleans Public Defenders' Office
Reynolds v. Day
as 24-30017
Petitioner:
Dashone Marcel Reynolds
Respondent:
Travis Day, Warden, B. B. Rayburn Correctional Center and David Brian LeBlanc
Reynolds v. Day
as 24-30018
Petitioner:
Dashone Marcel Reynolds
Respondent:
Nickolas Davis, Detective and Travis Day, Warden, B. B. Rayburn Correctional Center
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.
