Cases 1 - 10 of 3,763
Nelson v. State of Mississippi
as 1:2024cv00103
Petitioner:
Derrick Nelson
Respondent:
State of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Barber v. State of Mississippi et al
as 3:2024cv00157
Plaintiff:
Terry Lynn Barber
Defendant:
State of Mississippi, Tate Reeves, Lynn Fitch and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Winding *RESTRICTED FILER* v. Reeves et al
as 4:2024cv00050
Plaintiff:
James C. Winding *RESTRICTED FILER*
Defendant:
Tate Reeves, Marc McClure, Lynn Fitch and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Hinton v. State of Mississippi
as 1:2024cv00093
Petitioner:
Shannon Rochelle Hinton
Respondent:
State of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thompson v. Cain et al
as 1:2024cv00091
Petitioner:
Dennis Thompson
Respondent:
Burl Cain and Lynn Fitch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Grimes v. USA
as 1:2024cv00088
Petitioner:
Jimmy Ray Grimes
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Smith v. State of Mississippi
as 3:2024cv00139
Petitioner:
Anthony Smith
Respondent:
State of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. Miss
as 3:2024cv00128
Petitioner:
Terry E. Johnson, III
Respondent:
Miss
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thomas v Barnes
as 4:2024cv00046
Petitioner:
Forrest Thomas, III
Respondent:
Timothy Barnes and Attorney General of the State of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Beale v. Huffman
as 3:2024cv00109
Petitioner:
Jerry Beale, Jr.
Respondent:
Brand Huffman
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.
