Cases 1 - 10 of 70
John Coleman v. Kim Henderson
as 23-3938
Petitioner / Appellant:
JOHN C. COLEMAN
Respondent / Appellee:
KIM HENDERSON, Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
John Coleman v. Kim Henderson
as 23-3900
Petitioner / Appellant:
JOHN C. COLEMAN
Respondent / Appellee:
KIM HENDERSON, Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
Lyons v. Warden Toledo Correctional Institution
as 2:2023cv03532
Petitioner:
Javon Lyons
Defendant:
Warden Kim Henderson
Respondent:
Warden Toledo Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
McDougald v. Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
as 1:2023cv00509
Petitioner:
Jerone McDougald
Respondent:
Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Randall Hutchison
as 23-3558
Petitioner:
In re: RANDALL TYLER HUTCHISON
Respondent:
KIM HENDERSON, Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Justin McElroy v. Kim Henderson
as 23-3395
Petitioner / Appellant:
JUSTIN MCELROY
Respondent / Appellee:
KIM HENDERSON, Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
McElroy v. Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
as 1:2022cv00253
Petitioner:
Justin McElroy
Respondent:
Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Evick v. Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
as 1:2022cv00111
Plaintiff:
Jason T. Evick
Defendant:
Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Evick v. Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
as 1:2021cv00494
Petitioner:
Jason T. Evick
Respondent:
Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
In re: William Dixon
as 21-3469
Petitioner:
In re: WILLIAM R. DIXON
Respondent:
WARDEN, TOLEDO CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
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.
