Fifth Circuit Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 165,324
Grimes v. USA
as 1:2024cv00088
Petitioner:
Jimmy Ray Grimes
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Stallworth v. Walker County, Texas et al
as 4:2024cv01833
Plaintiff:
Bryan Stallworth
Defendant:
Walker County, Texas, Sheriff Clint McRae, Sheriff Keith Dehart and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Conner v. Warden
as 5:2024cv00645
Plaintiff:
**Sanctioned/Barred* Albertus Conner, Jr
Defendant:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Smith v. Cooley
as 2:2024cv00644
Plaintiff:
Jeffery Sanchez Smith
Defendant:
Keith Cooley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. Harris County Sheriff's Officer Reyes
as 4:2024cv01839
Plaintiff:
Scott Smith
Defendant:
Harris County Sheriff's Officer Reyes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. 3 Unknown Inmates et al
as 4:2024cv01841
Plaintiff:
Scott Smith
Defendant:
3 Unknown Inmates, D.O. Herrington and Harris County Jail
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Poole v. David George Hillburn et al
as 4:2024cv01834
Plaintiff:
Aaron Bernard Poole
Defendant:
David George Hillburn, Kevin W. Capps and Tiffany Chambers
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smith v. J. Frago et al
as 4:2024cv01840
Plaintiff:
Scott Smith
Defendant:
J. Frago, Officer Harrington and Sargent C. Lee
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Polk v. Lumpkin
as 9:2024cv00092
Petitioner:
Mavis Ray Polk
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Dingle v. Port Arthur Police Department
as 1:2024cv00174
Plaintiff:
Marthur L Dingle
Defendant:
Port Arthur Police Department
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.
