Cases 11 - 20 of 58
BOYD v. JACKSON ST et al
as 5:2023cv00235
Plaintiff:
DAVIOUS MARQUES BOYD and DAVIOUS MARQUEZ BOYD
Defendant:
JACKSON ST, GA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, MACON STATE PRISON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Boyd v. Jackson St. et al
as 1:2023cv02574
Plaintiff:
Davious Marques Boyd
Defendant:
Jackson St., GA Department of Corrections, Macon State Prison and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Robert Clark v. Cowens
as 22-13385
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ROBERT L. CLARK
Defendant / Appellee:
COWENS, Macon State Prison
GIBSON v. MACON STATE PRISON et al
as 5:2022cv00338
Plaintiff:
ARMOND GIBSON
Defendant:
MACON STATE PRISON, WARDEN TARMASHE SMITH, TIMOTHY SALES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Christopher Jones v. Commissioner, Georgia Department of Corrections, et al
as 22-12906
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CHRISTOPHER L. JONES
Defendant / Appellee:
COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS REGIONAL DIRECTOR, MACON SP WARDEN and others
MCCRAY v. WHITE et al
as 5:2022cv00094
Plaintiff:
TRAVONTEA MCCRAY
Defendant:
CERT OFFICER WHITE, CAPTAIN HUDSON, WARDEN SMITH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
HUMPHREY v. SMITH et al
as 5:2021cv00436
Plaintiff:
JOSHUA TAYLOR HUMPHREY
Defendant:
WARDEN TARMARSHE SMITH, CHRISTOPHER KNIGHT, SERGEANT RONNESHA TULLIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
RUTLEDGE v. SMITH et al
as 5:2021cv00025
Respondent:
WARDEN TARMARSHE SMITH, STATE OF GEORGIA, MACON STATE PRISON and others
Petitioner:
BOBBY RUTLEDGE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Evans v. Macon State Prison
as 1:2020cv00457
Plaintiff:
Randle Evans
Defendant:
Macon State Prison
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
DAKER v. WARD
as 5:2019cv00126
Defendant:
WARDEN SECRETARY TENAKA BROWN, LISA FOUNTAIN, TIMOTHY SALES and others
Plaintiff:
WASEEM DAKER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
