Cases 1 - 10 of 19
Frazier v. Odum
as 4:2024cv00037
Petitioner:
James A. Frazier
Respondent:
Deputy Warden Roy Odum
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Frazier v. Odum
as 4:2024cv00027
Petitioner:
James A. Frazier
Respondent:
Warden Roy Odum
Not Yet Classified:
Attorney General State of Georgia (Notice Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
JONES v. ODUM
as 5:2023cv00482
Petitioner:
ANTONIO JONES
Respondent:
WARDEN ROY ODUM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
STYLES v. ODUM
as 7:2023cv00103
Petitioner:
DERRICK STYLES
Respondent:
WARDEN ROY ODUM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WORTHEN v. YORK et al
as 5:2023cv00047
Plaintiff:
JACQUEZ WORTHEN
Defendant:
Officer YORK, HOCOMB, TAREL TODDMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WORTHEN v. YORK et al
as 7:2023cv00067
Plaintiff:
JACQUEZ WORTHEN
Defendant:
YORK, HOCOMB, TAREL TODDMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Baez v. Odum
as 1:2023cv02179
Petitioner:
Roberto Baez and Reberto Baez
Respondent:
Deputy Warden Roy Odum
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Baez v. Odum
as 4:2023cv00131
Petitioner:
Roberto Baez
Defendant:
Warden Roy Odum
Not Classified By Court:
Attorney General State of Georgia (Notice Only)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hughes v. Odum et al
as 5:2023cv00028
Plaintiff:
John Hughes
Defendant:
Warden Roy Odum, Warden Cox, Warden Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Keith v. Ward et al
as 5:2022cv00064
Plaintiff:
Paul Keith
Defendant:
Commissioner Timothy Ward and Head Warden Roy Odum
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.
