Coleman v. Dretke

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that parolees have protected liberty interest in not being required to participate in sex offender treatment
• holding that parolees have protected liberty interest in not being required to participate in sex offender treatment
• concluding that imposition of sex-offender condition at issue here did not “shock the conscience” so as to violate substantive due process
• holding that labeling an inmate as a sex offender and requiring intrusive and behavior-modifying therapy as a condition of parole implicated a liberty interest
• holding that a parolee who has not been convicted of a sex offense may not be burdened with sex offender registration and therapy without due process
• concluding that the “highly invasive nature” of the test implicates significant liberty interests

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).