Cases 1 - 10 of 139
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00738
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Briceno-Romero v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 3:2024cv00089
Petitioner:
Marcos Andres Briceno-Romero
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Giagnacovo v. Romero et al
as 4:2024cv00545
Plaintiff:
Hector Damian Giagnacovo
Defendant:
Romero, Sanchez, Ed Gonzalez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Giagnacovo v. Romero et al
as 4:2024cv00539
Plaintiff:
Hector Damian Giagnacovo
Defendant:
Romero, Sanchez, Ed Gonzalez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Espinoza v. Soliz et al
as 5:2023cv01339
Plaintiff:
Pedro Espinoza, Jr.
Defendant:
Ms. FNU Soliz, Lieutenant D. Romero and Susie Hernandez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Adams et al
as 5:2023cv00134
Plaintiff:
Franklin Smith
Defendant:
FNU Adams, Vincent Romero and FNU LNU 5:23-CV-134-C
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nixon v. United States of America
as 4:2023cv00599
Petitioner:
Romero Robles Nixon and Nixon Leonel Romero Robles
Respondent:
United States of America and Warden at FMC-Fort Worth
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Hernandez v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 3:2023cv01215
Petitioner:
Carlos Romero Hernandez
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Hernandez v. Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
as 6:2023cv00270
Petitioner:
Carlos Romero Hernandez
Respondent:
Director Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Romero v. Davis et al
as 5:2022cv01368
Plaintiff:
Richard Roy Romero
Defendant:
Warden Bernie Davis, SGT. Samantha Mendez, Co. III Genisis Cruz 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.
