Cases 141 - 150 of 66,672
Garcia v. Lumpkin
as 24-40314
Petitioner:
Antonio A. Garcia
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
McBride v. Lumpkin
as 24-50333
Petitioner:
Kirk Wayne McBride, Sr.
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Rogers v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00817
Petitioner:
Victor Charles Rpgers and Victor Charles Rogers
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Aragones v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 3:2024cv00148
Petitioner:
Nelson Aragones
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Bonner v. Lumpkin
as 24-40307
Petitioner:
Ryan Rydell Bonner
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Escamilla v. Judge Medrano
as 3:2024cv00149
Petitioner:
Jorge Melenudo Escamilla
Respondent:
Judge Medrano
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Frickey v. Bickham
as 2:2024cv00556
Plaintiff:
Ryk Anthony Frickey
Defendant:
E. Dustin Bickham
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Louisiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Curry v. Wingfield
as 3:2024cv00141
Plaintiff:
Freddie Lee Curry
Defendant:
B. Wingfield, Federal Bureau of Prisons and United States Attorney General
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Garcia v TDCJ Director
as 6:2024cv00157
Petitioner:
Antonio Andres Garcia
Respondent:
TDCJ Director
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ortiz v. Bobby Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01608
Petitioner:
Anthony Ortiz
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.
