Legal Opinion
John Marshall v. Cranston Mitchell State Board of Probation and Parole
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided August 1, 1995No. 94-1914PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LOKEN, Circuit Judge.
Missouri inmate John Marshall appeals the dismissal of his pro se complaint as frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Seeking injunctive and damage relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Marshall’s complaint alleges that defendants violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to procedural due process when one member of a three-member Parole Hearing Panel left in the middle of a hearing to consider Marshall’s application for parole. The district court 1 dismissed Marshall’s complaint because “the statutes and regulations cited by plaintiff do not create a liberty or property interest…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal & Correctional ComplexSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Kentucky Department of Corrections v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Olim v. WakinekonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Tony Joe Gale v. Dick Moore, Chairman, Missouri Board of Probation and Parole, Bill Duncan, Carolyn v. AtkinsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1985
- Millard L. Swenson v. Myrna Trickey Larry Trickey Captain Fred ArflackCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1993
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Lemeshko v. WronaDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2004
- Persechini v. CallawayCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011
- Adams v. AgnielCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2005
- Snodgrass v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
- Ayers v. NorrisDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1999
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.