Steven D. Stewart v. John Tate, D. Lacost, S. Landreman, Jennifer Kramer, L. Fait, J. Westover, A. Davis, and E. Peissig

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin dismissed Steven D. Stewart’s pro se complaint against former parole commission members and correctional officials. The court held that Stewart lacked a due process claim because Wisconsin law does not create a liberty interest in discretionary parole and that his due process and equal protection claims were barred by Heck v. Humphrey. The dismissal was with prejudice, the case was closed, and a strike was recorded under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

Holdings

1. The complaint did not state a due-process claim because Wisconsin has not created a liberty interest in parole by placing substantive limits on parole-decision discretion, and denial of discretionary parole is not a deprivation of liberty protected by the Due Process Clause.
2. Heck v. Humphrey barred Stewart's due-process and equal-protection claims because a judgment in his favor would necessarily imply that the parole decision continuing his confinement was invalid.
3. Leave to amend was denied because amendment would be futile where Heck barred the complaint.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Stewart's allegations stated a due-process claim based on the denial of discretionary parole and allegedly false information in his parole record.
2. Whether Stewart's allegation that parole was denied because of his race stated an equal-protection claim.
3. Whether Heck v. Humphrey barred Stewart's due-process and equal-protection claims seeking damages and declaratory relief.
4. Whether Stewart should be granted leave to amend his complaint.

Disposition

dismissed