Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Erma Wilson v. Midland County, Texas, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 22-50998 · judgment September 13, 2024
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Questions presented
Respondent Midland County prosecuted petitioner Erma Wilson with an active county prosecutor secretly working on her trial as the presiding judge’s law clerk. If Wilson had learned of that due process violation while in state custody, she could have sought relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 (the federal habeas corpus statute). But the county hid the violation until after Wilson’s sentence expired, making § 2254 unavailable. So she sued for damages under § 1983. The Fifth Circuit, sitting en banc, held that § 1983 is also unavailable to Wilson under this Court’s decision in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), and that she must go to state court for different relief instead. Six judges “emphatically” dissented. They called on this Court to resolve a “deep and enduring circuit split” regarding § 1983’s presumptive availability in Wilson’s circumstances. In five circuits, § 1983 is unavailable without regard for the lack of access to § 2254. But in six circuits, § 2254’s unavailability typically means § 1983’s availability. This Court has yet “to settle” that debate of statutory interpretation. Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749, 752 n.2 (2004). The questions presented are:
-
If a person never had access to § 2254 to impugn the constitutionality of her state criminal proceeding, is § 1983 presumptively available (as in six circuits), or must she always use state law instead (as in five)?
-
Is a § 1983 damages claim that impugns the constitutionality of a state criminal proceeding always analogous to a claim of malicious prosecution?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Jaba Tsitsuashvili
Institute for Justice
For respondent
Steven Carroll Kiser
Lynch, Chappell & Alsup, P.C.
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 5 conferences
Amicus briefs
1 cert-stage
Proceedings
- Mar 30 2026Petition DENIED.
- Mar 23 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/27/2026.
- Jan 07 2026Supplemental brief of petitioner Erma Wilson filed.
- Jun 23 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/26/2025.
- Jun 17 2025Rescheduled.
- Jun 03 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/18/2025.
- Apr 30 2025Rescheduled.
- Apr 23 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/15/2025.
- Apr 22 2025Reply of petitioner Erma Wilson filed. (Distributed)
- Apr 09 2025Brief of respondents Midland County, Texas, et al. in opposition filed.
- Apr 09 2025Brief of respondent Albert Schorre, Jr. in opposition filed.
- Feb 25 2025Motion of Albert Schorre, Jr. to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 11, 2025, for all respondents.
- Feb 24 2025Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 11, 2025, for all respondents.
- Feb 22 2025Motion of Albert Schorre, Jr. to extend the time to file a response from March 12, 2025 to April 11, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
- Feb 21 2025Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 12, 2025 to April 11, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
- Feb 10 2025Response Requested. (Due March 12, 2025)
- Feb 05 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2025.
- Jan 21 2025Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.
- Jan 17 2025Waiver of right of respondent Midland County, Texas and Weldon (Ralph) Petty, Jr. to respond filed.
- Jan 13 2025Waiver of right of respondent Albert Schorre, Jr. to respond filed.
- Dec 12 2024Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 21, 2025)