Wilks v. Ohio

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding abstention is not warranted if the state charges were “brought in bad faith for the purpose of retaliating for or deterring the exercise of constitution- ally protected rights”
• explaining that “a bad faith prosecution or a prosecution brought for purposes of harassment” occurs when the plaintiff’s rights “cannot be vindicated by undergoing the prosecution”
• laying out a fact-intensive test for whether a prosecution constitutes unconstitutional retaliation for an exercise of First Amendment rights
• noting “the traditional reluctance of federal courts to interfere in the state criminal process and reflects the strong State interests involved in the administration of the criminal law”
• finding access to the courts an interest protected by the First Amendment
• bad faith, retaliatory prosecution found where state reinstated previously dormant criminal charges against plaintiff after plaintiff instituted civil action against state deputy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).