Billy B. Tucker v. Sheriff Randall and Lieutenant Speenburg

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the right to counsel would be implicated if a pretrial detainee were not allowed to talk to his lawyer for four days
• noting that plaintiff was \unable to investigate crucial facts because he [was] incarcerated in a facility different from that in which the alleged conduct took place\
• acknowledging that denying a pre-trial detainee access to a telephone for four days would violate the Constitution in certain circumstances, such as if a person’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel were implicated
• “Denying a pre-trial detainee a telephone for four days would violate the Constitution in certain circumstances. The Sixth Amendment right to counsel would be implicated if plaintiff was not allowed to talk to his lawyer for the entire four day period.”
• “[P]laintiff is unable to investigate crucial facts because he currently is incarcerated in a facility different from that in which the alleged conduct took place.”
• appointment of counsel appropriate when plaintiff presented colorable claim of deliberate indifference to serious medical needs resulting in permanent deformities

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).