US District Court for the Southern District of Texas Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 71 - 80 of 10,990
Edwards v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00905
Petitioner:
Robert C. Edwards
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Edwards v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00909
Petitioner:
Robert C. Edwards
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Conley v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00850
Petitioner:
David Ray Conley, III
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Douglas v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00855
Petitioner:
Roderick Bernard Douglas
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Conley v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00867
Petitioner:
David Ray Conley, III
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Conley v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00833
Petitioner:
David Ray Conley, III
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00804
Petitioner:
Matthew Thomas Jones
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rogers v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00817
Petitioner:
Victor Charles Rpgers and Victor Charles Rogers
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Stewart v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00805
Petitioner:
Joshua Lynn Stewart
Respondent:
Brian Collier and Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
McCray v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00917
Petitioner:
Donald McCray
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.
