Legal Opinion · Dissent

Patrick Fluker v. State of Mississippi

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided June 11, 2015No. 2013-CT-00608-SCTPublished

1DissentKitchens, Justice

¶ 16. I respectfully dissent for two reasons. First, I do not agree that Fluker’s claims before this Court are barred by either the statutory successive pleadings bar or common law res judicata. Second, this Court’s approval of the summary dis*477missal of Fluker’s due process claim is premature, because the record before us is silent with regard to the question of whether the revocation of Fluker’s conditional release comported with federal and state due process requirements.

¶ 17. At the outset, the majority recognizes that Fluker’s second challenge to the revocation of his post-release…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Rowland v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 2010
  4. Dunaway v. WH Hopper & Associates, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Little v. v. & G Welding Supply, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1997

13 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