John Houston Sellars v. Raymond K. Procunier

Petitioner John Houston Sellars (“Sellars”) is an inmate of the California Mens Colony at San Luis Obispo. Respondent Procunier was chairman of the California Adult Authority. 1 Petitioner filed this action in district court, alleging that Procunier and other California Adult Authority officials had conspired to deprive him of rights under the first, fifth, sixth, eighth and fourteenth amendments by giving him a parole release date that requires him to serve an excessively long prison sentence. The district court granted summáry judgment for the defendants on the ground that parole board members are absolutely immune to suit under the Civil Rights Act ( 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ) 2 for actions taken when processing parole applications.

The question before us is whether parole board members enjoy any immunity from civil rights suits brought against them by prisoners, 3 and if so, whether that immunity is absolute or qualified.

*1298 FACTS

In 1973, petitioner was convicted of arson in Los Angeles County Superior Court. Petitioner's probation report indicates that within a 10-month period petitioner had ignited flammable liquid at the doors of four Los Angeles-area ballet studios.…

concurring specially:

I concur in the result.

641 F.2d 1295 John Houston SELLARS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Raymond K. PROCUNIER et al., Defendant-Appellee. No. 78-1120. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 15, 1980. Decided April 9, 1981. John Houston Sellars, San Diego, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant. Ramon De La Guardia, Sacramento, Cal., for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Before HUG and ALARCON, Circuit Judges, and BLUMENFELD * , District Judge. ALARCON, Circuit Judge: 1 Petitioner John Houston Sellars ("Sellars") is an inmate of the California Mens Colony at San Luis Obispo. Respondent Procunier was chairman of the California Adult Authority. 1 Petitioner filed this action in district court, alleging that Procunier and other California Adult Authority officials had conspired to deprive him of rights under the first, fifth, sixth, eighth and fourteenth amendments by giving him a parole release date that requires him to serve an excessively long prison sentence. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants on the ground that parole board members are absolutely immune to suit under the Civil Rights Act…