No. 18-9530

Terry Margheim v. Kenneth Buck, et al.

Lower Court: Tenth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-06-03
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: favorable-termination fourth-amendment innocence legal-process malice probable-cause supreme-court-precedent unlawful-seizure
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Are malice and favorable termination indicative of innocence, necessary elements to prove a violation of the Fourth Amendment?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Are malice and favorable termination indicative of innocence, necessary elements to prove a violation of the Fourth Amendment? If the legal process is tainted and probable cause is lacking, does the tainted determination accrue, extinguish, or somehow convert an unlawful seizure claim into a separate claim under the clarification by Manuel v. City of Joliet of Supreme Court precedent? . ii

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-07-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-09
Amended proof of service filed with respect to brief in opposition of respondents Kenneth Buck, et al.
2019-06-25
Brief of respondents Kenneth Buck, et al. in opposition filed.
2019-05-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 3, 2019)

Attorneys

Kenneth Buck, et al.
Andrew David RingelHall & Evans, LLC, Respondent
Andrew David RingelHall & Evans, LLC, Respondent
Terry Margheim
Terry Margheim — Petitioner
Terry Margheim — Petitioner