Jesse Engebretson v. Mike Mahoney, 724 F.3d 1034

Engebretson pleaded guilty in 1993 to four counts of sexual assault and received four concurrent 20-year sentences.
Montana persistent felony offender statute imposed an additional 30-year term, but the trial court suspended it and imposed probation instead.
Montana Supreme Court held the initial sentencing order illegal and vacated/remanded; on remand a different judge did not impose a five-year term or probation tied to the persistent offender status.
Engebretsons filed a pro se §1983 action against Warden Mahoney, Director Slaughter, and later the State, alleging rights violations during imprisonment and probation enforcement.
The district court dismissed claims against Mahoney and Slaughter for enforcing a facially valid order, and dismissed the State on Eleventh Amendment grounds; the appeal addresses immunity.
The court ultimately held that prison officials enforcing facially valid court orders have absolute immunity under §1983 for conduct prescribed by those orders.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether enforcing facially valid court orders yields absolute immunity	Engebretson contends immunity should be limited; enforcement caused improper probation.	Mahoney/Slaughter enforced the orders as required; immunity protects such conduct.	Yes, absolute immunity applies.
Standing to seek damages under §1983	Engebretson alleges unlawful probation and lack of access to legal resources, causing injury.	No actual injury required beyond deprivation of rights; damages may be nominal.	They have standing; nominal damages available if rights violated.
Whether prior Ninth Circuit qualified immunity cases control	Alston and Stein suggest qualified immunity governs.	Those cases do not control this facially valid-order enforcement scenario.	No; absolute immunity adopted.

Miller v. Gammie, 335 F.3d 889 (9th Cir. 2003) (functional approach to absolute immunity for judicial-process functions)
Valdez v. City & Cnty. of Denver, 878 F.2d 1285 (10th Cir. 1989) (immunity for executing facially valid court orders to avoid chilling judicial process)
Patterson v. Von Riesen, 999 F.2d 1235 (8th Cir. 1993) (absolute immunity for warden enforcing confinement under facially valid order)
Francis v. Lyman, 216 F.2d 583 (1st Cir. 1954) (immunity for enforcement of judicial orders by officials)
Moss v. Kopp, 559 F.3d 1155 (10th Cir. 2009) (absolute immunity for sheriff’s deputies enforcing court orders)
Coverdell v. Department of Social & Health Services, 834 F.2d 758 (9th Cir. 1987) (absolute quasi-judicial immunity for enforcing court orders)