Supreme Court· 11/9/1981

Jago v. Van Curen

Citations

454 U.S. 14
102 S. Ct. 31
70 L. Ed. 2d 13
1981 U.S. LEXIS 141
50 U.S.L.W. 3370

How courts have described this case

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

holding that no liberty interest in the expectancy of parole is created under a statute in which the parole decision is discretionary
holding case not moot where prisoner had been released on parole subject to conditions \that significantly restrict this freedom\
holding per curiam that no liberty interest was created either by Ohio statutes or by the “ ‘mutually explicit understanding’ ” of parole board and inmate that inmate would be granted “ ‘shock parole’ ”
holding per curiam that no liberty interest was created either by Ohio statutes or by the '\mutually explicit understanding\' of parole board and inmate that inmate would be granted \'shock parole\'
holding no liberty interest or due process protections were implicated when an inmate was initially granted parole but the order was rescinded at a later meeting without providing the inmate a hearing
finding Ohio statute did not create a liberty interest in the expectancy of parole because parole decision was discretionary

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Blackmun, Stevens, Brennan, Marshall

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

155 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.