Does the Fourteenth Amendment apply in the context of cruel and unusual punishment claims?
The following excerpt is from Turner v. Hubbard, CASE NO. 1:11-cv-01670-DLB PC (E.D. Cal. 2012):
A claim regarding cruel and unusual punishment is properly brought as an Eighth Amendment claim, not a substantive due process claim. Patel v. Penman, 103 F.3d 868, 874 (9th Cir. 1996). Thus, the Fourteenth Amendment is not applicable.
Plaintiff does not state a claim for violation of Article I, section 13 of the California Constitution, concerning unreasonable search and seizures. Plaintiff fails to demonstrate that he has a private civil cause of action based on section 13. Wigfall v. City & County of San Francisco, C 06-4968 VRW, 2007 WL 174434 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 22, 2007).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
