Hussein v. City of Perrysburg, 09-4054, involved a homeowners’ suit against a city, a city inspector and other individuals in their official and personal capacities, claiming that defendants violated their procedural and substantive due process rights by ordering a construction worker to remove a temporary asphalt layer in their driveway.

 

Fields v. Howes, 09-1215, concerned a challenge to the district court’s conditional grant of defendant’s petition of habeas relief from his conviction for third degree criminal sexual conduct.  In affirming the conditional grant, the court held that, under Mathis v. US, 391 U.S. 1 (1968), a Miranda warning is required whenever an incarcerated individual is isolated from the general prison population and interrogated about conduct occurring outside the prison.  Here, the Michigan Court of Appeals’ conclusion that, although defendant was in custody, interrogation without a Miranda warning was permissible because the questioning concerned an unrelated matter contradicts clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court in Mathis.  The court also held that there is no question that the failure to suppress defendant’s confession was not harmless error.

Related Resources:

  • Full text of Hussein v. City of Perrysburg, 09-4054
  • Full text of Fields v. Howes, 09-1215

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Civil Rights

Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court

Criminal

Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records

Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules