Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

WILLIE CRENSHAW, APPELLANT, v. ROBERT PARRATT, ET AL., APPELLEES.

PER CURIAM.

Willie Crenshaw brings this action for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Robert Parratt, Warden of the Nebraska State Penitentiary. Crenshaw, formerly an inmate of the penitentiary, was scheduled for mandatory parole under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 83-1,111(5) on January 14, 1979. Because he refused to sign a form consenting to the customary conditions of mandatory parole, and also refused to appear before the Parole Board, he was not released. The District Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment. We affirm.

The Hon. Warren K. Urbom, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.

We assume that plaintiff had a liberty interest of which the State could not deprive him without whatever process was due. The difficulty with plaintiff's case is that he was not deprived of anything. This is not a case, properly understood, in which Crenshaw was denied parole. Rather, he was entitled to parole, the State offered him parole, and he would have received it simply by signing a form. The deprivation, if any, was self-inflicted. No one claims that the usual conditions of parole required by the State are invalid or improper, or that the State had power to waive those conditions.

Perhaps Crenshaw did not understand the situation. Perhaps he thought (wrongly) that he had a legal right to unconditional release. In either event, the State did all it was required to do.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CRENSHAW v. PARRATT
(Jan 26, 1983)