Muhammad, AKA Mease v. Close

Supreme Court

Muhammad, AKA Mease v. Close

539 U.S. 925, 123 S. Ct. 2573

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJune 16, 2003

Docket02-9065

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 539 U.S. 925 (Muhammad, AKA Mease v. Close) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Muhammad, AKA Mease v. Close, 539 U.S. 925, 123 S. Ct. 2573 (2003).

Pincite

Opinion

C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed informa pauperis granted, and certiorari granted limited to the following questions: “1. Whether a plaintiff who wishes to bring a § 1983 suit challenging only the conditions, rather than the fact or duration, of his confinement, must satisfy the favorable termination requirement of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U. S. 477 (1994). 2. Whether a prison inmate who has been, but is no longer, in administrative segregation may bring, a § 1983 suit challenging the conditions of his confinement (i. e., his prior placement in administrative segregation) without first satisfying the favorable termination requirement of Heck v. Humphrey.” Corinne Beckwith, Esq., of Washington, D. C., is appointed to serve as counsel for petitioner in this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed informa pauperis granted, and certiorari granted limited to the following questions: “1. Whether a plaintiff who wishes to bring a § 1983 suit challenging only the conditions, rather than the fact or duration, of his confinement, must satisfy the favorable termination requirement of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U. S. 477 (1994). 2. Whether a prison inmate who has been, but is no longer, in administrative segregation may bring, a § 1983 suit challenging the conditions of his confinement (i. e., his prior placement in administrative segregation) without first satisfying the favorable termination requirement of Heck v. Humphrey.” Corinne Beckwith, Esq., of Washington, D. C., is appointed to serve as counsel for petitioner in this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

539 U.S. 925, 123 S. Ct. 2573, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/muhammad-aka-mease-v-close-scotus-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack