Cases 41 - 50 of 747
Frazier II v. Lumpkin
as 4:2023cv00652
Petitioner:
Keith Alan Frazier II
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Pete v. Lumpkin
as 4:2023cv00654
Petitioner:
Andrew Pete
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Green v. Warden Parcker
as 4:2023cv00577
Petitioner:
James Daniel Green
Respondent:
Warden Parcker and Bobby Lumpkin, Director, TDCJ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sanchez v. Lumpkin
as 4:2023cv00497
Petitioner:
Arnulfo Sanchez
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Murphy v. Lumpkin
as 4:2023cv00267
Petitioner:
Jacob E Murphy
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cooper v. Lumpkin
as 4:2022cv04475
Petitioner:
Roderick Cooper
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Peters v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 4:2022cv04253
Plaintiff:
Michael Geoffrey Peters
Defendant:
Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gormley v. Lumpkin
as 4:2022cv04087
Petitioner:
Martin Joseph Gormley, III
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Peyronel v. Texas Department Of Criminal Justice et al
as 4:2022cv03747
Petitioner:
Bobby Joe Peyronel
Defendant:
Texas Department Of Criminal Justice and Capt Phonso J Rayford
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Choyce v. Lumpkin
as 4:2022cv03718
Petitioner:
Clifton Ray Choyce
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
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.
