Cases 11 - 20 of 36
Harmon v. Bowen
as 3:2022cv00102
Petitioner:
Dakarai Harmon
Respondent:
Warden Tommy Bowen and Christopher Carr
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WHITTENBURG v. BOWEN et al
as 4:2022cv00080
Petitioner:
WILLIAM HOYT WHITTENBURG
Respondent:
Tommy Bowen and Dodge State Prison
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Maddox v. Bowen et al
as 1:2022cv01151
Petitioner:
Giovonnte Maddox
Respondent:
Tommy Bowen and Christopher Carr
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WHITTENBURG v. BOWEN et al
as 5:2022cv00098
Petitioner:
WILLIAM HOYT WHITTENBURG
Respondent:
WARDEN TOMMY BOWEN and DODGE STATE PRISON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Huynh v. Bowen et al
as 1:2022cv00377
Petitioner:
Nghia Van Huynh
Respondent:
Tommy Bowen and The Attorney General of the State of Georgia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Beaubrun v. Georgia Department of Corrections et al
as 3:2022cv00002
Plaintiff:
Thony Beaubrun
Defendant:
Georgia Department of Corrections, Timothy C. Ward and Warden TOMMY BOWEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Williams v. In The Superior Court of Troup County
as 3:2021cv00179
Petitioner:
Arsenio Cardell Williams
Respondent:
In The Superior Court of Troup County
Defendant:
Warden Tommy Bowen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Beaubrun v. Georgia Department of Corrections et al
as 1:2021cv03463
Plaintiff:
Thony Beaubrun
Defendant:
Georgia Department of Corrections, Timothy C. Ward and Warden Tommy Bowen
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
STINSON v. BOWEN
as 4:2021cv00119
Petitioner:
MICKEY CARL STINSON
Respondent:
Warden TOMMY BOWEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
STEWART v. BOWEN et al
as 1:2021cv00117
Defendant:
CHERYL ANN FRAZIER, JUANITA THORPE, Warden TOMMY BOWEN and others
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER STEWART
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
