Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Johnson v. Sheriff, Wayne Dicky
as 5:2023cv01530
Petitioner:
Earnest Key Johnson
Respondent:
Director of TDCJ Bobby Lumpkin and Wayne Dicky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ross v. Cueto
as 5:2023cv01324
Petitioner:
Earnest Lynn Ross
Respondent:
Senior Warden Edmundo R. Cueto
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Fontenot v. Lumpkin
as 4:2023cv03721
Petitioner:
Earnest J Fontenot
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Glover, Jr. v. Pharmacist et al
as 4:2023cv03324
Plaintiff:
Earnest Lee Glover, Jr.
Defendant:
Pharmacist, Samuel Adesoba, NPR Kim and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Glover Jr v. Eke et al
as 4:2023cv02647
Plaintiff:
Ernest Lee Glover Jr and Earnest Lee Glover, Jr.
Defendant:
Correctional Officer Eke and Correctional Officer Arenau
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ross v. USA
as 4:2023cv00641
Petitioner:
Earnest Lynn Ross
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate/Correct Illegal Sentence
Johnson v. Dicky
as 4:2023cv01948
Petitioner:
Earnest K. Johnson
Respondent:
Wayne Dicky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Glover v. Collier et al
as 4:2022cv04113
Plaintiff:
Earnest Lee Glover, Jr.
Defendant:
Brian Collier, Unknown Longoro and Unknown Turner
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Utley v. Lumpkin
as 4:2022cv03931
Petitioner:
Earnest Utley
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Glover v. Sharee et al
as 6:2022cv00424
Plaintiff:
Earnest Lee Glover, Jr.
Defendant:
Warden Unknown Sharee, Warden Unknown Ragsdale, Warden Unknown Steigler and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
