Cases 1 - 10 of 90
King v. State of Oklahoma et al
as 5:2023cv01141
Plaintiff:
Carey M King, Tearra King, Deoyon Janae Moore and others
Defendant:
Charles King, Cannady Paries, Deoyonte Moore and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Davis v. Crow et al
as 5:2023cv00219
Plaintiff:
Antoine Davis
Defendant:
Director DOC Scott Crow, GEO Group Inc, Amber Martin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
King v. Bridges
as 5:2022cv00906
Petitioner:
Rodney King
Respondent:
Carrie Bridges, Director DOC Scott Crow and John O'Connell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Shelton v. Crow
as 5:2022cv00893
Petitioner:
Christopher Shelton
Respondent:
Director DOC Scott Crow
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bourque v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 5:2022cv00887
Petitioner:
Armand P. Bourque
Respondent:
Director TDCJ-CID and Oklahoma Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (state)
Mason v. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice et al
as 5:2022cv00832
Plaintiff:
Deondray Raymond Mason
Defendant:
The Texas Department of Criminal Justice and TDCJ CID Director
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Dunn v. Crow
as 5:2022cv00451
Petitioner:
Robert David Dunn
Respondent:
Director DOC Scott Crow
Defendant:
Carrie Bridges
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Davis v. Crow
as 5:2022cv00162
Petitioner:
Jimmy Joshua Davis
Respondent:
Director DOC Scott Crow
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Henson v. Nunn
as 5:2022cv00105
Respondent:
John O'Connell, Scott Nunn, Director DOC Scott Crow and others
Petitioner:
Tommie D Henson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Quattlebaum v. Crow
as 5:2022cv00084
Petitioner:
Kerry Quattlebaum
Respondent:
Director DOC Scott Crow
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.
