No. 21-1179

Eric Lund v. Jeffrey Datzman, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-02-25
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) Experienced Counsel
Tags: 42-usc-1983 civil-rights exclusionary-rule fourth-amendment harmless-error heck-v-humphrey
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2022-06-23 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

Whether the Heck v. Humphrey bar on § 1983 suits is categorically inapplicable when a convicted individual brings a Fourth Amendment claim seeking damages for an unreasonable search or seizure but not for the conviction obtained using fruits of the constitutional violation, regardless of whether the factual record reveals a particular exclusionary-rule exception or harmless-error theory that could potentially sustain the conviction's validity despite the violation.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Heck v. Humphrey bar on § 1983 suits is categorically inapplicable when a convicted individual brings a Fourth Amendment claim seeking damages for an unreasonable search or seizure but not for the conviction obtained using fruits of the constitutional violation, regardless of whether the factual record reveals a particular exclusionary-rule exception or harmless-error theory that could potentially sustain the conviction's validity despite the violation

Docket Entries

2022-06-27
Petition DENIED.
2022-06-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/23/2022.
2022-06-06
Reply of petitioner Eric Lund filed. (Distributed)
2022-06-03
Waiver of the 14-day waiting period for the distribution of the petition under Rule 15.5 filed by petitioner.
2022-05-26
Brief of respondents California, et al. in opposition filed.
2022-05-26
Brief of Non-State Respondents in opposition filed.
2022-05-09
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 26, 2022, for all respondents.
2022-05-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 18, 2022 to May 26, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
2022-04-18
Response Requested. (Due May 18, 2022)
2022-04-18
Letter from counsel for petitioner dated April 18, 2022 received.
2022-04-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/22/2022.
2022-03-25
Waiver of right of respondents County of Solano, Solano County District Attorney's Office, Krishna Abrams and Ilana Shapiro to respond filed.
2022-03-24
Waiver of right of respondents City of Vacaville, Jeffrey Datzman, et al. to respond filed.
2022-03-08
Waiver of right of respondent Susannah Lund to respond filed.
2022-03-08
Letter pursuant to Rule 12.6 of respondent Susannah Lund filed.
2022-02-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 28, 2022)

Attorneys

California, et al.
Joshua A. KleinCalifornia Dept Justice - Office Solicitor General, Respondent
Christopher D. BeattyCalifornia Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
City of Vacaville, Jeffrey Datzman, et al.
Richard W. OsmanBertrand, Fox, Elliott, Osman and Wenzel, Respondent
County of Solano, Solano County District Attorney's Office, Krishna Abrams and Ilana Shapiro
Danielle Kono LewisSelman Breitman LLP, Respondent
County of Solano, Solano County District Attorney's Office, Krishna Abrams, Ilana Shapiro, City of Vacaville, and Jeffrey Datzman, et al.
Jonathan Yates EllisMcGuireWoods LLP, Respondent
Eric Lund
Hashim M. MooppanJones Day, Petitioner
Susannah Lund
Susannah LundLaw Office of Susannah M. Lund, Respondent