No. 22-7547
Carl Lee Ashley v. Mary Boayue, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-rights court-of-appeals cruel-and-unusual-punishment due-process eighth-amendment judicial-review legal-standard objective-prong prison-conditions standing
Key Terms:
Punishment
Punishment
Latest Conference:
2023-09-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the court of appeals erred in finding that petitioner could not establish the objective prong of his Eighth Amendment claims
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED pip THE™) courT OF APPEALS ERR IN FINDING THAT PETITIONER COULD NOT ESTABLISH THE OBJECTIVE PRONG OF HIS EIGHTH AMENDMENT CLAIMS.
Docket Entries
2023-10-02
Petition DENIED.
2023-06-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-06-16
Waiver of right of respondents MDOC Defendants Mary Arends, David Brazee, Shawn Brewer, Sirena Landfair, Lana McCarthy, Kim Schaub and Don Spaulding to respond filed.
2023-05-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 14, 2023)
Attorneys
Carl Lee Ashley
Carl Lee Ashley — Petitioner
MDOC Defendants Mary Arends, David Brazee, Shawn Brewer, Sirena Landfair, Lana McCarthy, Kim Schaub and Don Spaulding
Ann Maurine Sherman — Michigan Department of Attorney General, Respondent