Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Cooper v. Holcomb et al
as 2:2015cv00109
Petitioner:
Andrew Newton Cooper
Respondent:
Holcomb, Kim Thomas and The Attorney General of the State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Bell v. Thomas et al
as 7:2014cv02188
Petitioner:
Shicolby Devol Bell
Respondent:
Kim Thomas and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Brown v. Department of Corrections et al (INMATE 3)
as 2:2014cv00385
Plaintiff:
Eric Lee Brown
Defendant:
Department of Corrections, Kim Thomas, Cynthia D. Stewart and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
McLain v. Thomas et al
as 5:2014cv00380
Petitioner:
John H. McLain, V
Respondent:
Kim Thomas and Attorney General for the State of Alabama
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Brumfield v. Bently et al
as 5:2014cv00365
Petitioner:
George A Brumfield
Respondent:
Robert Bently, Kim Thomas and Mark Burton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Springfield v. Thomas et al
as 6:2013cv02022
Petitioner:
Jamie Lynn Springfield
Respondent:
Kim Thomas and Attorney General for the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Lawson v. Thomas et al
as 2:2013cv00490
Petitioner:
Stanley Arthur Lawson
Respondent:
Kim Thomas, Dewayne Estes and Attorney General for the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hines v. Thomas et al
as 7:2012cv02683
Petitioner:
Kelvin Hines
Respondent:
Kim Thomas, Willie Thomas and Attorney General of the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cameron v. Thomas et al
as 3:2011cv04317
Petitioner:
Jimmy Frank Cameron
Respondent:
Willie Thomas, Kim Thomas and Attorney General for the State of Alabama, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Shapley v. Thomas et al
as 3:2011cv02434
Petitioner:
Shaun Glovis Shapley
Respondent:
Kim Thomas, Kenneth Jones and Attorney General of State of Alabama, The
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.
