Cases 31 - 40 of 99
Thomas v. Shults et al
as 3:2017cv00724
Plaintiff:
Arnold-Hamilton Thomas
Defendant:
Larry Shults, Federal Bureau of Prisons and United States Dept of Justice
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Wallace v. Deville et al
as 2:2017cv00407
Plaintiff:
Prentiss Arnold Wallace
Defendant:
Keith Deville
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Louisiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Darden v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
as 3:2016cv03361
Petitioner:
Arnold D Darden
Respondent:
Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Chris Arnold v. Lorie Davis, Director
as 16-41478
Petitioner - Appellant:
CHRIS AARON ARNOLD
Respondent - Appellee:
LORIE DAVIS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Ellis Morganfield, Jr. v. Robert Hernandez, et al
as 16-50626
Petitioner - Appellant:
ELLIS MORGANFIELD, JR.
Respondent - Appellee:
ROBERT HERNANDEZ, Jail Administrator for Guadalupe County Adult Detention Center and ARNOLD S. ZWICKE, Sheriff, Guadalupe County
Morganfield v. Hernandez et al
as 5:2016cv00448
Respondent:
Robert Hernandez and Arnold S. Zwicke
Petitioner:
Ellis Morganfield, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Arnold v. Stephens
as 1:2016cv00012
Petitioner:
Chris Aaron Arnold
Respondent:
William Stephens
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Anthony Arnold v. William Stephens, Director
as 15-51235
Petitioner - Appellant:
ANTHONY CHARLES ARNOLD
Respondent - Appellee:
WILLIAM STEPHENS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Arnold Reed v. William Stephens, Director
as 15-11039
Petitioner - Appellant:
ARNOLD RAY REED
Respondent - Appellee:
WILLIAM STEPHENS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Arnold v. Windham
as 1:2015cv01193
Defendant:
Jeff Windham
Plaintiff:
Albert Arnold
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
