US District Court for the Western District of Texas Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 161 - 170 of 7,354
Cavett v. Lumpkin
as 1:2022cv01042
Petitioner:
Bryan Scott Cavett
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Smith v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
as 3:2022cv00364
Petitioner:
Aaron S. Smith
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Davis v. Lumpkin
as 1:2022cv01027
Petitioner:
Edward Lee Davis
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Castro v. Lumpkin
as 1:2022cv01023
Petitioner:
Jeremy Castro
Respondent:
Major Bobby Lumpkin and Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Natividad v. Steifer
as 7:2022cv00216
Petitioner:
Ernesto L Natividad
Respondent:
Steifer and Director, TDCJ Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Griffith v. Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
as 1:2022cv01010
Petitioner:
Michael Joseph Griffith
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Stone v. Smith
as 1:2022cv01032
Petitioner:
Alfred Lee Stone
Respondent:
Jimmy S. Smith, Internal Revenue Service and Ken Paxton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Kines v. Lumpkin
as 5:2022cv01089
Petitioner:
Christopher Kines
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Moose v. LNU
as 1:2022cv01000
Plaintiff:
Thirplus Timo Moose
Defendant:
FNU LNU
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Graham v. Bureau of Prisons, FCI-La Tuna
as 3:2022cv00348
Petitioner:
Michael S. Graham
Defendant:
Bureau of Prisons, FCI-La Tuna
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.
