Cases 1 - 10 of 61
Alvin Jones v. Scott Kernan et al
as 2:2018cv06723
Respondent:
Scott Kernan and Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Petitioner:
Alvin Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jones v. Moyer et al
as 8:2018cv02321
Defendant:
Dayena M. Corcoran, Inmate Health Services, Laura Y Armstead and others
Plaintiff:
Phillip Alvin Jones
Interested Party:
Office of the Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr
Jones v. Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services et al
as 1:2016cv02729
Plaintiff:
Phillip Alvin Jones, Jr.
Defendant:
Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services, J. Michael Stouffer and Warden Armstead
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jones v. Stephens, Director TDCJ-CID
as 2:2014cv00246
Petitioner:
George Alvin Jones
Respondent:
William Stephens, Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jones v. Stephens, Director TDCJ-CID
as 2:2014cv00190
Petitioner:
George Alvin Jones
Respondent:
William Stephens, Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv02177
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Jones v. Stephens
as 2:2014cv00081
Petitioner:
George Alvin Jones
Respondent:
William Stephens, Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Terrance Brown v. Alvin Jones, Warden
as 14-30315
Petitioner - Appellant:
TERRANCE T. BROWN
Respondent - Appellee:
ALVIN JONES, Warden Riverbend Detention Center
Phillip Jones v. James Peguese
as 13-7799
Petitioner - Appellant:
PHILLIP ALVIN JONES
Respondent - Appellee:
JAMES V. PEGUESE, Warden/Designee and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND
Jones v. Stephens, Director TDCJ-CID
as 2:2013cv00136
Petitioner:
George Alvin Jones
Respondent:
William Stephens, 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.
