Cases 1 - 10 of 2,210
Simpson v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv02126
Petitioner:
James Burchard Simpson
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Parks v. Lumpkin
as 7:2024cv00133
Petitioner:
Luther Dwayne Parks
Respondent:
Director of TDCJ Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Elizondo v. Lumpkin
as 7:2024cv00134
Petitioner:
Jaime Elizondo
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Bonner v. Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
as 6:2024cv00286
Petitioner:
Alfred Bonner
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Garcia v. Lumpkin, Director, TDCJ:
as 2:2024cv00080
Petitioner:
Antonio A Garcia
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, TDCJ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Villafranco Jr. v. Lumpkin
as 7:2024cv00128
Petitioner:
Jesse Villafranco Jr.
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Campbell v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00023
Petitioner:
Joel Campbell
Respondent:
Major Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Evans Jr. v. Lumpkin Case electronically transferred to Eastern District of Texas- Tyler.
as 6:2024cv00186
Petitioner:
Johnny Lee Evans Jr.
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Rodriguez v. Lumpkin
as 1:2024cv00074
Petitioner:
Jorge Alberto Rodriguez
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Campbell v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01910
Petitioner:
Joel Campbell
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
