green
Positive treatment
6.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 1978 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1978
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Vest v. Easley
See Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784 (4th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 56 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Michael Erin Scott v. Ronald J. Angelone, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections
See Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 788 (4th Cir.) (en banc) cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Scott v. Angelone
See Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 788 (4th Cir.) (en banc) cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Bayerle v. Godwin
See Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 800 (4th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 98 S.Ct. 1659 , 56 L.Ed.2d 92 (1978) (parole authorities have- broad discretion in balancing the State’s needs and prisoner’s rights in deciding whether to grant parole).
cited
Cited "see"
John Stephen Gilreath, and Claude F. Bloodgood, Iii, Donald W. Newton, Keith H. Ogren v. Virginia Parole Board
See Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 800 (4th Cir.1977) (en banc), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Krawetz v. Murray
See Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 789 (4th Cir.1977) (en banc) (“[I]t is readily apparent from an examination of Virginia law that a prisoner has a right to be considered for parole, and that this right is protected by statutory safeguards.”), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 98 S.Ct. 1659 , 56 L.Ed.2d 92 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Marvel v. Cavanaugh
See Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 800 (4th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 (1978). 3 We therefore affirm the district court's order.
cited
Cited "see"
Messer v. Rader
See Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 800 (4th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Jack Ray Vigue v. Bobby Norris Vassar, Chairman, Virginia Parole Board
See Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 800 (4th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Swinson v. United States Parole Commission
See Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784 (4th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 98 S.Ct. 1659 , 56 L.Ed.2d 92 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Juan v. Rafferty
See Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 798 (4th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 98 S.Ct. 1659 , 56 L.Ed.2d 92 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Talbert v. Hinkle
See, e.g., Titus v. Angelone, No. 2:96cv49 (Jan. 3, 1997) (unpublished); see also Vann v. Angelone, 73 F.3d 519, 521-22 (4th Cir.1996) (stating that because there is no constitutional right to parole, if a state chooses to establish a system of parole, the state’s parole authorities are given "a wide range for experimentation and the exercise of discretion”) (citing Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 800 (4th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 98 S.Ct. 1659 , 56 L.Ed.2d 92 (1978)). 16 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hill v. Jackson
The Supreme Court has held that if state law creates a right that implicates a person’s liberty, the individual possessing this right is entitled to “those minimum procedures appropriate under the circumstances and required by the Due Process Clause to insure that the state-created right is not arbitrarily abrogated.” Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 557 , 94 S.Ct. 2963, 2975 , 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974); see also Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 788 (4th Cir.1977), ce rt. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 98 S.Ct. 1659 , 56 L.Ed.2d 92 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Michael Leon Hill v. Clarence L. Jackson, Hibbard Kendrick v. Clarence L. Jackson, Stephen Reedy v. Clarence L. Jackson, Marvin Leon Grimm, Jr. Tommy Crute Dennis Witt Robert Dame Jimmy L. McNutt Herbert Haymore, and Douglas Wardlaw June A. Goodwin Lawrence Daniels Walter R. Coleman Michael Leon Hill Stephen Reedy Hibbard Kendrick v. Clarence L. Jackson Lewis W. Hurst John A. Brown Gail Y. Brown Jacqueline F. Fraser, Donald W. Hoffman, Amicus Curiae
The Supreme Court has held that if state law creates a right that implicates a person's liberty, the individual possessing this right is entitled to "those minimum procedures appropriate under the circumstances and required by the Due Process Clause to insure that the state-created right is not arbitrarily abrogated." Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 557 , 94 S.Ct. 2963, 2975 , 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974); see also Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 788 (4th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 98 S.Ct. 1659 , 56 L.Ed.2d 92 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
James Anthony Sweeton v. Robert Brown, Jr.
(2×)
See, e.g., Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 800-801 (4th Cir.1977) (en banc), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 98 S.Ct. 1659 , 56 L.Ed.2d 92 (1978). 6 This confusion existed in the Sixth Circuit prior to the holding of the Supreme Court in Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238 , 103 S.Ct. 1741 , 75 L.Ed.2d 813 (1983), that state statutes and regulations governing prison hearings do not create an independent federal due process liberty interest or right in the prisoner, and the holding of the Sixth Circuit in Inmates of Orient Correctional Institute v. Ohio State Adult Parole Authority, 929 F.2d 233 …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Daniels v. Woodbury County
See Carey, 588 F.2d at 232 ; White, 530 F.2d at 754; see also Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 792 (4th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 98 S.Ct. 1659 , 56 L.Ed.2d 92 (1978); Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Ruckelshaus, 439 F.2d 584, 596-98 (D.C.Cir.1971); Holmes v. New York City Housing Authority, 398 F.2d 262, 265 (2d Cir.1968); Hornsby v. Allen, 326 F.2d 605, 610 (5th Cir.1964).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
George Raymond Daniels, Delores Farley, Jayne Feuhrer, Stella McMahan and Bluette Caron v. Woodbury County, Iowa Donald Erickson, Donald Lawrenson, Mark Larnan, Kenneth Rodeen, Wayne Thompson, Individually and as Members of Woodbury County's Board of Supervisors Ralph Klocke, Individually and as Woodbury County's General Relief Director Georgia Schieffer, Individually and as General Assistant Social Worker I, George Raymond Daniels, Delores Farley, Jayne Feuhrer, Stella McMahan and Bluette Caron v. Woodbury County, Iowa, Donald Erickson, Donald Lawrenson, Mark Larnan, Kenneth Rodeen, Wayne Thompson, Individually and as Members of Woodbury County's Board of Supervisors Ralph Klocke, Individually and as Woodbury County's General Relief Director Georgia Schieffer, Individually and as General Assistant Social Worker I
See Carey, 588 F.2d at 232 ; White, 530 F.2d at 754 ; see also Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784, 792 (4th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 98 S.Ct. 1659 , 56 L.Ed.2d 92 (1978); Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Ruckelshaus, 439 F.2d 584, 596-98 (D.C.Cir.1971); Holmes v. New York City Housing Authority, 398 F.2d 262, 265 (2d Cir.1968); Hornsby v. Allen, 326 F.2d 605, 610 (5th Cir.1964).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal & Correctional Complex
(4×)
See also Franklin v. Shields, 569 F. 2d 784, 800 (CA4 1977), cert. denied, 435 U. S. 1003 (1978); United States ex rel.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Marvin Jones, on His Own Behalf and on Behalf of Those Similarly Situated v. Fred R. Diamond, Etc.
(2×)
See, e. g., Franklin v. Shields, 4 Cir., 1977, 569 F.2d 784 (en banc), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 , 98 S.Ct. 1659 , 56 L.Ed.2d 92 (1978). 6 Moore’s Federal Practice H 54.-70[4] at 1306, 1307 defines the terms as follows: In general, a party in whose favor judgment is rendered by the district court is the prevailing party in that court . . .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lynell Franklin
v.
Pleasant C. Shields
v.
Pleasant C. Shields
77- 6016.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 24, 1978.
435 U.S. 1003
Published
Lynell FRANKLIN et al., petitioners,
v.
Pleasant C. SHIELDS et al
No. 77- 6016
Supreme Court of the United States
April 24, 1978
1
Motion of Public Defender of Wisconsin for leave to file a brief, as amicus curiae, granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
2
Mr. Justice BRENNAN, Mr. Justice WHITE and Mr. Justice MARSHALL would grant certiorari.