Cases 81 - 90 of 66,631
Garcia v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 6:2024cv00158
Petitioner:
Antonio Andres Garcia
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Vathis v. Brown
as 3:2024cv01030
Petitioner:
Christopher Marcus Vathis
Respondent:
Marion Brown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Jackson v. Director
as 5:2024cv00064
Petitioner:
Reidie Jackson
Respondent:
TDCJ-CID Director
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Leal v. Lumpkin, Director TDCJ-CID
as 4:2024cv00372
Petitioner:
Nathaniel Leal
Respondent:
371st District Court of Tarrant County, Texas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bello v. Johnson
as 4:2024cv00363
Petitioner:
Olamide Olatayo Bello
Respondent:
Mark Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Kindred v. Lumpkin
as 6:2024cv00219
Petitioner:
Herman Lee Kindred
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Darge v. Warden - Yazoo City Low
as 3:2024cv00235
Plaintiff:
Patrick Darge
Defendant:
Warden - Yazoo City Low
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Padilla v. Lumpkin
as 24-10365
Petitioner:
Ismael Hernandez Padilla
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Barnes v. TDCJ
as 3:2024cv01038
Petitioner:
MonQuas Barnes
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Evans v. Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
as 6:2024cv00218
Petitioner:
Douglas Ray Evans
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
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.
