Legal Opinion
Franklin v. Shields
District Court, W.D. Virginia
Decided August 5, 1975No. Civ. A. 74-C-214-R(C), 74-C-215-R (C), 74-C-230-R(C) and 74-C-109-H (C)PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
TURK, Chief Judge.
In the consolidated cases of Bradford v. Weinstein, 1 and Jenkins v. Tyler, 519 F.2d 728 (1974) the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to parole eligibility hearings and remanded the cases to the district courts for determination of “how much process is ‘due.’ ” At the time of these decisions or shortly thereafter this court received pro se complaints from the four named plaintiffs herein, each of whom is a Virginia prisoner who was eligible for parole and had been denied…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Goss v. LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- John Houston Sellars v. Raymond K. ProcunierCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Franklin v. ShieldsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1977
- United States of America Ex Rel. Charles Richerson v. Dennis Wolff, Warden, Sheridan Institution, and the Illinois Parole and Pardon BoardCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1976
- Sites v. McKenzieDistrict Court, N.D. West Virginia · 1976
- State v. MasonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1986
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.