US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 2,567
MILES v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
as 5:2025cv00017
Plaintiff:
RODNEY JEROME MILES
Defendant:
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MCCRAY v. OFFICERS OF THE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT OF FITZGERALD GEORGIA et al
as 1:2025cv00007
Petitioner:
SERGIO VASEAN MCCRAY
Respondent:
OFFICERS OF THE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT OF FITZGERALD GEORGIA, BEN HILL COUNTY, CPT TILLY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SWASO v. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
as 4:2025cv00011
Plaintiff:
KYRON S SWASO
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
MORRIS v. CALDWELL et al
as 5:2025cv00014
Defendant:
KAREEM FULLER, Warden ANTOINE CALDWELL, DEPUTY WARDEN LACHESA SMITH and others
Plaintiff:
DAVID ZEKE MORRIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
TINSLEY v. ODOM
as 7:2025cv00008
Defendant:
ODOM
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER TINSLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
TICE v. WILLIAMS et al
as 5:2025cv00010
Defendant:
CENTURION MEDICAL COMPANY, TYRONE OLIVER and WARDEN JOE WILLIAMS
Plaintiff:
CHEVY VANN TICE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DRIVER v. BALDWIN STATE PRISON
as 5:2025cv00009
Defendant:
BALDWIN STATE PRISON
Plaintiff:
TROYA SHANE DRIVER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BARROW v. WALTON COUNTY JAIL
as 3:2025cv00004
Defendant:
WALTON COUNTY JAIL
Plaintiff:
TAVIS BARROW
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
BEY v. BROOKS
as 5:2025cv00002
Defendant:
DEPUTY BROOKS
Plaintiff:
KIRIN ROGI BEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
JACKSON v. EMMONS
as 5:2024cv00481
Plaintiff:
JOHNNIE DEMOND JACKSON
Defendant:
WARDEN SHAWN EMMONS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
