Cases 111 - 120 of 167
Knox v. Aldridge et al
as 6:2010cv00044
Plaintiff:
Antone L. Knox
Defendant:
Debra Aldridge, Amy Thomas, Brian Holden and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Cannon v. State of Oklahoma et al
as 6:2009cv00499
Plaintiff:
Jemaine Monteil Cannon
Defendant:
State of Oklahoma, Department of Corrections, Randall G. Workman and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Selsor v. Workman, et al
as 09-5180
Petitioner - Appellant:
MICHAEL BASCOM SELSOR
Respondent - Appellee:
RANDALL G. WORKMAN, Warden, Oklahoma State Penitentiary and DREW EDMONDSON, Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Derrick v. Workman
as 6:2009cv00490
Petitioner:
Deneoval Derrick
Respondent:
Randall G. Workman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Jones v. Workman
as 5:2009cv01172
Petitioner:
Jared William Jones
Respondent:
Randall G Workman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bridgeforth v. Workman
as 6:2009cv00403
Plaintiff:
Terrence Bridgeforth
Defendant:
Randall G. Workman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Selsor v. Mullin, et al
as 4:2001cv00721
Petitioner:
Michael Bascom Selsor
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma and Randall G Workman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution
McCall v. Workman et al
as 5:2009cv00927
Petitioner:
Damian Deprist McCall
Respondent:
Randall G Workman and Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Martin v. Workman
as 4:2009cv00451
Petitioner:
Solly Lee Martin
Respondent:
Randall G Workman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Martin v. Workman
as 6:2009cv00270
Petitioner:
Solly L. Martin
Respondent:
Randall G. Workman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
