Legal Opinion
Gene Vontell Graham v. G. Michael Broglin
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided January 7, 1991No. 89-3201PublishedCited by 210 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
POSNER, Circuit Judge.
We write to clarify the relation between an action for habeas corpus (28 U.S.C. § 2254) and a civil rights action (42 U.S.C. § 1983) as vehicles by which state prisoners can challenge their confinement on federal constitutional grounds. After violating parole, Gene Graham was returned to an Indiana state prison to complete his sentence for robbery. He applied for work release but his application was denied because of a rule of the state parole authorities to the effect that a person who is imprisoned solely because he violated parole is ineligible for work release.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Preiser v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Maleng v. CookSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Jones v. CunninghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Andrews v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- United States v. Edison JordanCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by210 opinions
- Anthony Dewalt v. Lamark Carter, Correctional Officer Young, Carol BiesterCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2000
- Shaker Aamer v. Barack ObamaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2014
- Harry Allen Plyler v. Michael W. Moore, Director, South Carolina Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1997
- Gonzalez-Fuentes v. MolinaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2010
- Michael Richmond v. Joseph Scibana, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution at Oxford, WisconsinCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004
205 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.