Cases 1 - 10 of 1,656
Bailey v. Warden, FCC Coleman USP 1
as 5:2024cv00197
Petitioner:
Deon Anthony Romell Bailey
Respondent:
Warden, FCC Coleman USP 1
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Salem v. Burns et al
as 1:2024cv21509
Plaintiff:
Skylar Salem
Defendant:
William Burns, Chicago Police, Central Intelligence Agency and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
In re: Marcus Wright
as 24-11155
Petitioner:
In re: MARCUS WRIGHT
Respondent:
USP COLEMAN II WARDEN and UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Schaefer v. Warden, Coleman USP
as 5:2024cv00080
Petitioner:
Jason Paul Schaefer
Respondent:
Warden, USP Coleman II
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Glass v. USP Victorville
as 1:2024cv01372
Petitioner:
Donald Glass
Defendant:
USP Victorville
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Aloba v. Coleman USP I et al
as 5:2024cv00134
Plaintiff:
Oriyomi Sadiq Aloba
Defendant:
Coleman USP I and Warden of Coleman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Anderson v. Warden, USP Coleman 2
as 5:2024cv00066
Petitioner:
Denny Ray Anderson
Respondent:
Warden, USP Coleman 2
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Davis v. USP Coleman II
as 5:2024cv00116
Plaintiff:
Raynard Davis
Defendant:
USP Coleman II
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Richardson v. Warden, USP Coleman I
as 5:2024cv00043
Petitioner:
Jerome Richardson
Respondent:
Warden, USP Coleman I
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Ulmer v. Warden, USP Coleman II
as 5:2024cv00045
Petitioner:
Jerry Ben Ulmer
Respondent:
Warden, USP Coleman II
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
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.
