CA7: Detention after conviction is a due process question, not 4A question

Plaintiff’s detention after conviction is a due process issue (if at all) and not a Fourth Amendment issue. Jones v. York, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 13090 (7th Cir. May 16, 2022):

Finally, Jones argues she was wrongfully detained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. In Manuel v. City of Joliet, 137 S. Ct. 911, 197 L. Ed. 2d 312 (2017), the Supreme Court clarified that “detention without probable cause violates the Fourth Amendment ‘when it precedes, but also when it follows, the start of legal process in a criminal case.'” Lewis v. City of Chicago, 914 F.3d 472, 474 (7th Cir. 2019) (quoting Manuel, 137 S. Ct. at 918). But “once a trial has occurred, the Fourth Amendment drops out: A person challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support both a conviction and any ensuing incarceration does so under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Manuel, 137 S. Ct. at 920 n.8; see also Kuri v. City of Chicago, 990 F.3d 573, 575 (7th Cir. 2021) (“Manuel held that the Fourth Amendment supplies the basis for a [wrongful-detention] claim until the suspect is either convicted or acquitted.”). Jones admits she was not incarcerated until after her conviction. Thus, the Fourth Amendment does not provide a remedy for her incarceration.

This entry was posted in Due process. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.