Cases 1 - 10 of 10,990
Shepard v. Brazos County Sheriff Department et al
as 4:2024cv01913
Petitioner:
Tyrone Radale Shepard
Respondent:
Brazos County Sheriff Department and Wayne Dicky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Salinas v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01917
Petitioner:
John Thomas Salinas
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hughes v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01897
Petitioner:
Darren Tramell Hughes
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Gutierrez v. Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
as 4:2024cv01902
Petitioner:
Leonardo Gutierrez
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Whitaker v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00994
Petitioner:
Ryan Jivaro Whitaker
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Vallejo Recio v. Lumpkin
as 1:2024cv00042
Petitioner:
Daniel Vallejo Recio
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mousavi v. Mayorkas et al
as 4:2024cv01775
Plaintiff:
Mr. Ali Mousavi
Defendant:
Director Alejandro N. Mayorkas, US ATTORNEY GENERAL MERRICK GARLAND, Mr. Randy Tate and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Taylor v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01754
Petitioner:
Robert Cor'Darius Taylor
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mathews v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01755
Petitioner:
Mike Naoyuki Mathews
Respondent:
TDCJ, Director Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Tate v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01749
Petitioner:
Marquis Valantee Tate
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
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.
