Cases 1 - 10 of 144
Taylor v. Glynn County Detention Center et al
as 2:2024cv00039
Plaintiff:
Clinton Taylor
Defendant:
Glynn County Detention Center, Mrs. Harris and Mr. Wooten
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cantrell v. Adams et al
as 4:2022cv00249
Plaintiff:
Yusef Cantrell
Defendant:
Judge Kimberly Adams, D.A. Paul Howard, Jr. and Assistant D.A. Clinton Rucker
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
DAKER v. WARD et al
as 5:2022cv00342
Plaintiff:
WASEEM DAKER
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER TIMOTHY WARD, BRIAN OWENS, HOMER BRYSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Grier v. Perry
as 1:2022cv00388
Petitioner:
Demarkus Grier
Respondent:
Clinton Perry
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
SMITH v. PERRY et al
as 5:2022cv00044
Plaintiff:
JR LESTER J SMITH and LESTER J SMITH, JR
Defendant:
WARDEN CLINTON PERRY, DEPUTY WARDEN PETER EADY, TAMAJI SMITH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WILSON v. PERRY et al
as 5:2021cv00457
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL DAVID WILSON, JR
Defendant:
WARDEN CLINTON PERRY, JESSICA DEAN, LACHAKA MCKENZIE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Moragne v. Branche et al
as 1:2021cv03883
Defendant:
Gregory Garris, Jamaica Garris, Judge Candice Branche and others
Plaintiff:
Dorian L. Moragne
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rossell v. Perry
as 3:2021cv00056
Petitioner:
Taboris Rossell
Respondent:
Warden Clinton Perry
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
BROWNER v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 5:2021cv00066
Defendant:
WARDEN CLINTON PERRY, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, LIEUTENANT FREEMAN and others
Plaintiff:
ANTONIO BROWNER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MALLERY v. SMITH
as 1:2020cv05002
Respondent:
Warden Tarmarshe Smith
Petitioner:
CLINTON L MALLERY
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.
