Cases 131 - 140 of 3,322
Delacruz v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 6:2024cv00013
Petitioner:
Isidro Miguel Delacruz
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID and Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Whitaker v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00994
Petitioner:
Ryan Jivaro Whitaker
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Weaver v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 4:2024cv00238
Petitioner:
Joseph Weaver
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin and Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thomas v. Linthicum
as 24-40165
Plaintiff:
Jewell Thomas
Defendant:
Lanette Linthicum, Isaac Kwarteng, Jerry Sanchez and others
Nettles v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00980
Petitioner:
Donovan Nettles and Donavan Nettles
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Alonso v. Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
as 4:2024cv00968
Petitioner:
Ralph Ernest Alonso
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Cervantes v. Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
as 1:2024cv00293
Petitioner:
Tony Cervantes
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Lewis v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00996
Petitioner:
Derrick Lewis
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. Lumpkin
as 7:2024cv00076
Petitioner:
Travonn Johnson
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jackson v. Collier - TDCJ Director
as 6:2024cv00133
Petitioner:
Tracy Lynn Jackson
Respondent:
Bryan Collier - TDCJ Director and Bobby Lumpkin
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.
