Legal Opinion

Luster v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Decided August 27, 2004No. CR-03-1065Published

1Opinion of the Court

BASCHAB, Judge.

In a prison disciplinary proceeding, the appellant, Lebrón Luster, was found guilty of absconding supervision — absent without permission, a violation of Rule # E9, Regulation # 403. He was sanctioned with the loss of privileges for 45 days and referral for custody review. He also alleges that he was removed from work release as a result of the disciplinary proceeding.1 The appellant filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that prison officials violated his due process rights under Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 94 S.Ct. 2963, 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974), during the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Sandin v. ConnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  3. Ponte v. RealSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Williams v. DavisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1980
  5. Summerford v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1985

7 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