Cases 11 - 20 of 42
Mason v. Director, TDCJ-CID et al
as 3:2023cv02497
Plaintiff:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Defendant:
Director, TDCJ-CID, Preston Smith Unit, James Allred Unit and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mason v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 4:2023cv01085
Petitioner:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Receiver:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mason v. Smith
as 2:2023cv00172
Plaintiff:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Defendant:
Kevin Smith, et al
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mason v. Lumpkin
as 23-11024
Petitioner / Appellant:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Respondent / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Mason v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 3:2023cv02102
Plaintiff:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Defendant:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mason v. James Allred Unit Officials et al
as 4:2023cv03510
Plaintiff:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Defendant:
James Allred Unit Officials, Preston Smith Unit Officials, Bill Clements Officials and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mason v. TDCJ Agencies
as 2:2023cv00128
Plaintiff:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Defendant:
TDCJ Agencies
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mason v. State of Texas
as 3:2023cv01636
Petitioner:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Respondent:
State of Texas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Mason v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 2:2023cv00111
Petitioner:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mason v. Smith et al
as 2:2023cv00093
Plaintiff:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Defendant:
Kevin Smith, Jimmy Smith, Bryan Reitsma and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
