03-1356 Allen v. Guerrero, et al.

Listen to this article

“No Wisconsin state court has addressed whether deliberately incarcerating a person beyond his or her MR date violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Recent decisions of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, however, have concluded that facts such as those before us constitute an Eighth Amendment violation. We find these decisions persuasive.

“The Eastern District concluded unequivocally in Russell v. Lazar, 300 F. Supp. 2d 716 (E.D. Wis. 2004), that ‘[i]ncarcerating a prisoner beyond the termination of his sentence without penological justification violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment when it is the product of deliberate indifference.’…

“We conclude that the unlawfulness of the defendants’ actions was clearly established in 2000 despite the lack of unanimity among federal courts as to precisely which constitutional provision rendered their conduct unlawful.

“Therefore, although we agree that a reasonable public official could have believed in 2000 that deliberately incarcerating Allen beyond his MR date violated his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment instead of under the Eighth Amendment, we conclude that no reasonable public official could have believed that such continued detention was constitutionally permissible. The doctrine of qualified immunity protects against the unfairness of subjecting public officials to money damages ‘for picking the losing side of the controversy’ when the existence of a constitutional right has not been clearly established. Wilson v. Layne, 526 U.S. 603, 618 (1999). Here, however, any controversy over the specific source of the constitutional right not to be incarcerated beyond one’s mandatory release date cannot be said to have created any doubt regarding the existence of such a right.”

Order affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist IV, Dane County, Foust, J., Deininger, P.J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: John J. Glinski, Madison

For Respondent: Jeff Scott Olson, Madison