Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 21
Winston v. Pratt
as 21-50507
Defendant / Appellee: Board of Pardons and Paroles, Hill County District Attorney Mark Pratt and Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Plaintiff / Appellant: Bravern Ray Winston
Winston v. Pratt
as 21-50052
Defendant / Appellee: Board of Pardons and Paroles, Hill County District Attorney Mark Pratt and Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Plaintiff / Appellant: Bravern Ray Winston
Bravern Winston v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director
as 20-50747
Petitioner / Appellant: Bravern Ray Winston
Respondent / Appellee: Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Bravern Winston v. Mark Pratt, et al
as 20-50495
Defendant / Appellee: DIRECTOR LORIE DAVIS, BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES and HILL COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MARK PRATT
Plaintiff / Appellant: BRAVERN RAY WINSTON
Winston v. Pratt et al
as 6:2020cv00367
Defendant: Board of Pardons and Paroles, Hill County DA Mark Pratt and Director Lorie Davis
Plaintiff: Bravern Ray Winston
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bravern WinstonIn re: Bravern Winston
as 19-50878
Petitioner: In re: BRAVERN RAY WINSTON
Winston v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
as 6:2019cv00551
Defendant: Lorie Davis-Director TDCJ-CID
Petitioner: Bravern Ray Winston
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Winston v. Maryland Division Of Corrections et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 8:2019cv02463
Respondent: Govenor Larry Hogan and Maryland Division Of Corrections
Petitioner: Stanley Ray Winston
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Winston v. USA et al
as 1:2019cv02019
Respondent: M. A. Stancil and USA
Petitioner: Stanley Ray Winston
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
In re: Bravern Winston
as 18-50654
Movant: In re: BRAVERN RAY WINSTON

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.


Why Is My Information Online?