Cases 131 - 140 of 66,631
Conley v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv00833
Petitioner:
David Ray Conley, III
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Romero-Bonilla v. Ping
as 3:2024cv00129
Plaintiff:
Jose J. Romero Ronilla and Jose J. Romero-Bonilla
Defendant:
Warden L. Ping
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Escobedo v. Warden, TDCJ-CID
as 1:2024cv00092
Petitioner:
Ramiro Escobedo
Respondent:
Warden, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sparkman v. Hooper
as 2:2024cv01030
Plaintiff:
Nakeith C Sparkman
Defendant:
Tim Hooper
Respondent:
Attorney General State of Louisiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. Dauzat
as 5:2024cv00536
Plaintiff:
Lamont Johnson
Defendant:
Michelle Dauzat
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Tillman v. Scott County Sheriff Department et al
as 3:2024cv00118
Plaintiff:
Tyrus Tillman
Defendant:
Scott County Sheriff Department, Willie Anderson, Mike Lee and others
Interested Party:
Pro Se Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Dunham v. Director, TDCJ-CID
as 4:2024cv00247
Petitioner:
Thomas Eugene Dunham
Respondent:
Director, TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Johnson v. Hooper et al
as 2:2024cv01032
Plaintiff:
Saul Johnson
Defendant:
Timothy Hooper
Respondent:
Jeff Landry
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thomas v. Lumpkin
as 6:2024cv00150
Petitioner:
Antoine Thomas
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Davis v. Lumpkin
as 4:2024cv01514
Petitioner:
Michael William Davis
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
