Marlowe v. Fabian
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7888
8th Cir.2012Background
- Marlowe pled guilty to first-degree criminal sexual conduct and received 108 months with a five-year concurrent supervised-release term.
- He was designated a risk level two predatory offender requiring intensive supervised release with housing restrictions.
- Ramsey County largely handles supervision for intensive supervised release, but it refused to supervise Marlowe due to lack of local ties.
- Default housing consideration assigned Marlowe to a supervising agent in Washington County when no approved residence could be found.
- On his supervised release date, Marlowe was detained and later revoked for not having approved housing; he remained incarcerated while housing options were pursued.
- A state habeas petition followed; after initial denial, the Minnesota Court of Appeals remanded to restructure his release plan, and Marlowe was released to RS Eden in December 2008.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Heck bar Marlowe's §1983 claims? | Marlowe argues remand order satisfied Heck's favorable termination. | The remand did not constitute favorable termination; confinement remains unlawful only if termination occurred. | Heck bars the §1983 claims |
| Did the Court of Appeals' remand constitute favorable termination under Heck? | Remand to restructure release plan shows termination of confinement was contemplated. | Remand did not reverse, expunge, invalidate, or be impugned by a habeas writ. | Not a favorable termination; Heck applies |
Key Cases Cited
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (U.S. 1994) (favorable termination prerequisite for §1983 damages claims)
- Entzi v. Redmann, 485 F.3d 998 (8th Cir. 2007) (favorable termination requirement applies to §1983 even absent current incarceration)
- Sheldon v. Hundley, 83 F.3d 231 (8th Cir. 1996) (clarifies favorable termination concept under Heck)