No. 23-304
Thomas Neilsen v. John Kellner, in His Official Capacity as District Attorney, et al.
Response Waived
Tags: black-letter-law brady-rule civil-rights declaratory-relief due-process heck-doctrine heck-v-humphrey mooney-v-holohan prosecutorial-misconduct section-1983 supreme-court-precedent
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2023-10-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does 'Heck' or any other procedural issue bar a section 1983 petition asking for declaratory and injunctive relief when a prosecutor defiantly fails to follow 'black letter law' established by the Supreme Court
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
question presented is simple: (1) Does “Heck” or any other procedural issue bar . a section 1983 petition asking for declaratory and injunctive relief when a prosecutor defiantly fails to ‘ foliow “black letter law” established by this Supreme Court of the United States and the section 1983 relief requested was purposely designed to force the District Court to apply this Court’s precedent?
Docket Entries
2023-10-30
Petition DENIED.
2023-10-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/27/2023.
2023-09-28
Waiver of right of respondent John Kellner, et al. to respond filed.
2023-09-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 26, 2023)
Attorneys
John Kellner, et al.
Andrew David Ringel — Hall & Evans, LLC, Respondent
Thomas Neilsen
Thomas Neilsen — Petitioner