United States Fifth Circuit

In a civil rights action for violations of plaintiff's right to due process after defendants attached sex offender conditions to plaintiff's mandatory supervision, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed in part where: 1) the Texas procedure for providing parolees with their Coleman notice did not meet the constitutional requirements for procedural due process; and 2) on the spectrum of due process rights afforded by the Supreme Court in analogous cases, requiring a parolee who has not been convicted of a sex offense to register as a sex offender or participate in sex offender therapy required more process than was provided to the inmate in Wolff, but less process than was provided in Vitek. However, the order is vacated in part where the due process clause did not entitle plaintiff to counsel in Coleman notice proceedings.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/21/2010
• Published 05/21/2010

Judges

• W. EUGENE DAVIS, Circuit Judge:, Before DAVIS, WIENER, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fifth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Scott Charles Medlock (argued), James C. Harrington, Texas Civ. Rights Project, Austin, TX, for Meza., Celamine Cunniff, Asst. Atty. Gen., Law Enforcement Defense Div., Austin, TX, for Livingston and Jenkins., Bruce Russell Garcia, Asst. Atty. Gen., Law Enforcement Defense Div., Austin, TX, for Gutierrez, Aycock, Davis, Denoyelles, Leeper, Gonzalez and Owens.


• For Appellees:
  
• Thomas Matthew Lipovski (argued), Austin, TX, for all Defendants.