Cases 51 - 60 of 211
Shannon v. Epps et al
as 1:2013cv00035
Petitioner:
James M. Shannon
Respondent:
Christopher Epps and Attorney General for the State of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Grose v. Epps et al
as 3:2013cv00047
Petitioner:
Johnny Grose
Respondent:
Christopher Epps and Earnest Lee
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Young v. Epps
as 3:2012cv00867
Plaintiff:
Amir Rashad Young
Defendant:
Christopher Epps
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Griffin v. Epps et al
as 4:2012cv00112
Petitioner:
Sidney Ray Griffin
Respondent:
Christopher Epps
Defendant:
Romuio Armedariz
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Jackson v. Epps et al
as 2:2012cv00184
Petitioner:
William Lynn Jackson
Respondent:
Christopher Epps and Attorney General of the State of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Marcus Davis v. Christopher Epp
as 12-60768
Petitioner - Appellant:
MARCUS DAVIS
Respondent - Appellee:
CHRISTOPHER EPPS
Russell v. Epps et al
as 5:2012cv00136
Plaintiff:
Kevin Russell
Defendant:
Christopher Epps, Emmitt Sparkman, Robert Sturdivant and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Corley v. Epps et al
as 4:2012cv00088
Petitioner:
Randy Scott Corley
Respondent:
Christopher Epps, Lora Cole, Jerry Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jones v. Unknown 6/5/2012 Memo Transmitter et al
as 4:2012cv00132
Plaintiff:
Eric Jones
Defendant:
Unknown 6/5/2012 Memo Transmitter, Unknown 6/5/2012 Memo Receiver, E. L. Sparkman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Weed v. Epps
as 3:2012cv00545
Petitioner:
David Weed
Respondent:
Christopher Epps
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
