US District Court for the Western District of Texas Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 7,755
Tucker v. Lumpkin
as 6:2025cv00018
Petitioner:
Jerry Lee Tucker
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Aniles v. Hijar
as 3:2025cv00010
Petitioner:
Eric Aniles
Defendant:
Sandra Hijar
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Arambul-Rodriguez v. Warden, FCI McDowell
as 6:2025cv00008
Respondent:
Warden, FCI McDowell
Petitioner:
Luis Salvador Arambul-Rodriguez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Rodriguez v. Lumpkin
as 5:2025cv00022
Respondent:
Director Bobby Lumpkin
Petitioner:
Juan Roberto Rodriguez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Henderson v. McNamara
as 6:2025cv00011
Petitioner:
Dennis Henderson
Respondent:
Sheriff Parnell McNamara
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Lloyd v. Doolittle
as 1:2025cv00029
Petitioner:
James Bradley Lloyd
Respondent:
Wesley Doolittle
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Goble, Jr. v. Collier
as 7:2025cv00003
Respondent:
Bryan Collier
Petitioner:
William Clifford Goble, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gresham v. Lumpkin
as 5:2025cv00019
Petitioner:
Bryan Lamar Gresham
Respondent:
Major Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Odom v. Lumpkin
as 5:2025cv00018
Petitioner:
Kyle Mitchell Odom
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ramirez v. McNamara
as 6:2024cv00650
Respondent:
Sheriff Parnell McNamara
Petitioner:
Joseph L. Ramirez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
