No. 18-7159

Andrew Mark Lamar v. John O'Dell, Colorado Parole Board Member

Lower Court: Tenth Circuit
Docketed: 2018-12-20
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: administrative-procedure circuit-split circuit-splits civil-rights discretionary-parole due-process liberty-interest parole parole-release-hearings wilkinson-v-dotson
Latest Conference: 2019-02-22
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether reasonable tourists would find the district court's resolution of petitioner's due process claim debatable or wrong with respect to extending a liberty interest in discretionary parole release hearings following expiration of lower-end sentence for purposes of according adequate review procedures

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED To | QUETMER FEASONWBLE TURISTS WeUld FISD TNE OsrRicr SoURT s BESOCUTION) OF PETITIONLE RSS Due PRAGESS Gaim DEBAWBLE aR WRONG Whit RESPECT TH EXTENDING A LIBERTY INTEREST IN DISCRETION ARY PAROVE “RELEASE HEARINGS FOLLOWING ExPrRAT ON QF WWER-END SENTENCE FOR PURPOSAS CFE ACCORDING ADEQUATE RENIEN RRSGEDURES 8n0 > TH WHEMER REQSDNOADVE TURISTS WoUID FIND Whe OSTRIT SURT'S BESOLVTION OF PETITIONERS cOTENTION mar ME WIRD SRANT WOLDING IND Rieck v. PeHer, 631 £2] — 232 C28 Gr /1So), SYOULD BE FRUSWED WERE, THUS RECONALLINIG SPITS DENNEN GRCUITS, PEBSTABYE URONG ? i. .

Docket Entries

2019-02-25
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/22/2019.
2018-11-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 22, 2019)

Attorneys

Andrew Lamar
Andrew Mark Lamar — Petitioner
Andrew Mark Lamar — Petitioner