No. 25-131
David C. L. Walton v. Ashley Nehls
Tags: consent constitutional-rights eighth-amendment incarceration prison-official sexual-misconduct
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment CriminalProcedure Privacy
DueProcess Punishment CriminalProcedure Privacy
Latest Conference:
2025-10-10
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Eighth Amendment permits a rule treating an incarcerated person as capable of giving legally effective consent to sexual conduct with a prison official
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
All fifty states, the District of Columbia, and federal law make it a crime for a prison official to engage in sexual conduct with an incarcerated person, deeming consent legally irrelevant. The question presented is: Whether the Eighth Amendment, which is interpreted according to "evolving standards of decency," permits a contrary rule that treats an incarcerated person as capable of giving legally effective consent to sexual conduct with a prison official.
Docket Entries
2025-10-14
Petition DENIED.
2025-09-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/10/2025.
2025-09-16
Reply of David Christopher Walton submitted.
2025-09-16
Waiver of David Christopher Walton of the 14-day waiting period submitted.
2025-09-16
Reply of petitioner David Christopher Walton filed. (Distributed)
2025-09-16
Reply of petitioner David C. L. Walton filed. (Distributed)
2025-09-02
Brief of respondent Ashley Nehls in opposition filed.
2025-07-31
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 3, 2025)
Attorneys
Ashley Nehls
Vincent James Scipior — Coyne, Schultz, Becker and Bauer, S.C., Respondent
David Christopher Walton
Kristin Leigh McGough — Winston & Strawn LLP, Petitioner