Federal Case

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that, for statute of limitations purposes, “such [ ] claim[s] do[ ] not accrue so long as the potential for a judgment in the pending criminal prosecution continues to exist”
• abrogated on other grounds by Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 388 (2007). Claims which challenge post-arraignment detainment are barred by Heck. See McDonough v. Smith, ––– U.S. ––––, 139 S.Ct. 2149, 2155–56 (2019) (discussing malicious prosecution

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).