Legal Opinion
Jorge Mario Herrera v. Clarence Harkins
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided November 26, 1991No. 91-6176PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EBEL, Circuit Judge.
Appellant Herrera appeals the district court’s dismissal of his complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court ruled that because the appellant primarily challenged the fact or duration of his imprisonment, his only remedy was to seek a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. As explained below, we construe the appellant’s complaint to be partially an attack on parole procedures and therefore cognizable under section 1983.
The Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board denied the appellant parole in June 1990. The appellant contends that the Board based…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Preiser v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Hall v. BellmonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal & Correctional ComplexSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Chester Russ v. Paul Uppah, Rod Cozzetto, and John R. EnrightCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- Carroll Olson v. Gerald W. Hart, JudgeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- Laurie L. Roman-Nose v. New Mexico Department of Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- Reed v. McKuneCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- Cook v. CollinsDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 1993
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.