Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Mitchell v. San Angelo Police Department et al
as 6:2023cv00062
Plaintiff:
Fritzgera Charles Mitchell
Defendant:
San Angelo Police Department, John David Bouligny, Adrian E Hardy and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Dunn v. Adams
as 6:2020cv00613
Plaintiff:
Calvin Dunn
Defendant:
Charles Mitchell Adams and Van Zandt County Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mitchell v. Dallas County Sheriff Dept et al
as 3:2012cv01960
Plaintiff:
Charles Mitchell
Defendant:
Dallas County Sheriff Dept , Kalondra Davis , 1st Watch Sgt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mitchell v. Dallas County Jail
as 3:2011cv01608
Plaintiff:
Charles Mitchell
Defendant:
Dallas County Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mitchell v. City of Dallas et al
as 3:2010cv01968
Plaintiff:
Charles Mitchell
Defendant:
City of Dallas, Andrea Isom, Officer (TBA) #2 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mitchell v. Houston et al
as 3:2010cv01803
Plaintiff:
Charles Mitchell
Defendant:
Christopher Lee Houston, Officer #1, Corporal, Dallas Police Dept, Officer #2, Corporal, Dallas Police Dept and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mitchell v. Miller-Roach et al
as 3:2010cv01762
Plaintiff:
Charles Mitchell
Defendant:
NFN Miller-Roach, Kay Davis, Gary Lindsey and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mitchell v. Cervantes et al
as 3:2010cv00030
Plaintiff:
Charles Mitchell
Defendant:
Roel Cerventes and Jonathan Dominquez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mitchell v. McCoy et al
as 3:2009cv01376
Plaintiff:
Charles Mitchell
Defendant:
B McCoy, Jonathan Walker and Brian Emerson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mitchell v. Quarterman
as 4:2009cv00377
Petitioner:
Charles Mitchell
Respondent:
Nathaniel Quarterman
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.
