Cases 21 - 30 of 651
Oceguera v. Warden
as 5:2024cv00049
Petitioner:
Jonothan Giovanni Oceguera
Respondent:
FCI Texarkana Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Contreras v. Baysore et al
as 3:2024cv00189
Plaintiff:
Jose Antonio Martinez Contreras
Defendant:
Warden D. Baysore and FCI Yazoo City Medium
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Peterson v. Warden
as 5:2024cv00045
Petitioner:
Gary Glenn Peterson
Respondent:
FCI Texarkana Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Barnes v. Warden, FCI Three Rivers
as 2:2024cv00072
Plaintiff:
Nevon Barnes
Defendant:
Warden FCI Three Rivers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Sanchez v. Warden, FCI Big Spring
as 1:2024cv00045
Petitioner:
Arnulfo Castillo Sanchez
Respondent:
Warden, FCI Big Spring
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Brown v. Warden
as 5:2024cv00043
Petitioner:
Jerry Ray Brown
Respondent:
FCI Texarkana Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Shilling v. Warden
as 5:2024cv00039
Petitioner:
Ryan Joel Shilling
Respondent:
FCI Texarkana Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Barnes v. Warden, FCI Three Rivers
as 9:2024cv00044
Petitioner:
Nevon Barnes
Defendant:
Warden, FCI Three Rivers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Smith v. FCI Texarkana Warden
as 24-40142
Petitioner:
Curtis Smith
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division and FCI Texarkana Warden
Kingston v. Warden
as 5:2024cv00028
Petitioner:
Alexander M. Kingston
Respondent:
FCI Texarkana Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
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.
