Legal Opinion

Glauner v. Miller

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided July 27, 1999No. 98-15543PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Per curiam

Dale Glauner appeals from the district court’s Rule 12(b)(6) judgment of dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. He asserts that Nevada Revised Statutes § 213.1214,2 which requires a panel to certify that certain sexual offenders are not a “menace to the health, safety or morals of others” prior to parole eligibility, is facially unconstitutional. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the constitutionality of a state statute, and we affirm. See Crawford v. Lungren, 96 F.3d 380, 384 (9th Cir.1996) (providing for de novo review).

Glauner is a Nevada state prisoner,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Kolender v. LawsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal & Correctional ComplexSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Heller v. Doe Ex Rel. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. City of Chicago v. MoralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  5. Jordan v. De GeorgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1951

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. United States v. WhitlockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
  2. Hess v. BD. OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISIONCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  3. Lee v. WithrowDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1999
  4. Kissane v. JonesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
  5. United States v. Valle-MartinezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API