hudson
mcmillian
argued
november
decided
february
petitioner
hudson
louisiana
prison
inmate
testified
minor
bruises
facial
swelling
loosened
teeth
cracked
dental
plate
suffered
resulted
beating
respondent
prison
guards
mcmillian
woods
handcuffed
shackled
following
argument
mcmillian
respondent
mezo
supervisor
duty
watched
beating
merely
told
officers
much
fun
magistrate
trying
hudson
district
suit
found
officers
used
force
need
mezo
expressly
condoned
actions
ruled
respondents
violated
eighth
amendment
prohibition
cruel
unusual
punishments
awarded
hudson
damages
appeals
reversed
holding
inter
alia
inmates
alleging
use
excessive
force
violation
amendment
must
prove
significant
injury
hudson
prevail
injuries
minor
required
medical
attention
held
use
excessive
physical
force
prisoner
may
constitute
cruel
unusual
punishment
even
though
inmate
suffer
serious
injury
pp
whenever
prison
officials
stand
accused
using
excessive
physical
force
constituting
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
violative
cruel
unusual
punishments
clause
core
judicial
inquiry
set
whitley
albers
whether
force
applied
good
faith
effort
maintain
restore
discipline
maliciously
sadistically
cause
harm
extending
whitley
application
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
standard
allegations
force
whether
prison
disturbance
riot
lesser
disruption
works
innovation
see
johnson
glick
cert
denied
pp
since
whitley
approach
extent
injury
suffered
inmate
one
factors
considered
determining
whether
use
force
wanton
unnecessary
absence
serious
injury
relevant
end
eighth
amendment
inquiry
merit
respondents
assertion
significant
injury
requirement
mandated
termed
wilson
seiter
objective
component
eighth
amendment
analysis
whether
alleged
wrongdoing
objectively
harmful
enough
establish
constitutional
violation
component
contextual
responsive
contemporary
standards
decency
estelle
gamble
excessive
force
context
standards
always
violated
prison
officials
maliciously
sadistically
use
force
cause
harm
see
whitley
whether
significant
injury
evident
moreover
although
amendment
reach
de
minimis
uses
physical
force
provided
use
sort
repugnant
conscience
mankind
blows
directed
hudson
de
minimis
extent
injuries
thus
provides
basis
dismissal
claim
pp
dissent
theory
wilson
requires
inmate
alleges
excessive
force
show
significant
injury
addition
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
misapplies
wilson
ignores
body
eighth
amendment
jurisprudence
wilson
involve
allegation
excessive
force
respect
objective
component
eighth
amendment
claim
suggested
departure
estelle
progeny
dissent
argument
excessive
force
claims
conditions
confinement
claims
different
kind
likewise
unfounded
deny
difference
punching
prisoner
face
serving
unappetizing
food
ignore
concepts
dignity
civilized
standards
humanity
decency
animate
eighth
amendment
see
estelle
supra
pp
takes
position
respondents
legal
argument
conduct
isolated
unauthorized
prison
policy
therefore
beyond
scope
punishment
prohibited
eighth
amendment
argument
inapposite
record
since
appeals
left
intact
magistrate
determination
violence
issue
isolated
assault
ignores
magistrate
finding
supervisor
mezo
expressly
condoned
use
force
moreover
extent
respondents
rely
unauthorized
nature
acts
make
claim
addressed
appeals
presented
question
granted
certiorari
accordingly
pp
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
white
kennedy
souter
joined
stevens
joined
parts
stevens
filed
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
blackmun
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
thomas
filed
dissenting
opinion
scalia
joined
alvin
bronstein
appointment
argued
cause
petitioner
briefs
john
powell
steven
shapiro
mark
lopez
elizabeth
alexander
deputy
solicitor
general
roberts
argued
cause
amicus
curiae
urging
reversal
brief
solicitor
general
starr
assistant
attorneys
general
wright
ronald
mann
harry
mccall
special
assistant
attorney
general
louisiana
argued
case
respondents
brief
william
guste
attorney
general
jenifer
schaye
clifton
bingham
houston
gascon
iii
joseph
erwin
kopsa
assistant
attorneys
general
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
americans
effective
law
enforcement
daniel
hales
emory
plitt
wayne
schmidt
james
manak
prisoners
legal
services
project
theodore
howard
richard
arsenault
human
rights
watch
cameron
clark
prisoners
legal
service
new
york
john
gresham
stephen
latimer
brief
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
state
texas
et
al
dan
morales
attorney
general
texas
pryor
first
assistant
attorney
general
mary
keller
deputy
attorney
general
michael
hodge
charles
palmer
sharon
felfe
adrian
young
assistant
attorneys
general
joined
attorneys
general
respective
follows
warren
price
iii
hawaii
joseph
meyer
wyoming
frankie
sue
del
papa
nevada
robert
butterworth
florida
justice
delivered
opinion
time
incident
subject
suit
petitioner
keith
hudson
inmate
state
penitentiary
angola
louisiana
respondents
jack
mcmillian
marvin
woods
arthur
mezo
served
corrections
security
officers
angola
facility
early
morning
hours
october
hudson
mcmillian
argued
assisted
woods
mcmillian
placed
hudson
handcuffs
shackles
took
prisoner
cell
walked
toward
penitentiary
administrative
lockdown
area
hudson
testified
way
mcmillian
punched
hudson
mouth
eyes
chest
stomach
woods
held
inmate
place
kicked
punched
behind
testified
mezo
supervisor
duty
watched
beating
merely
told
officers
much
fun
app
result
episode
hudson
suffered
minor
bruises
swelling
face
mouth
lip
blows
also
loosened
hudson
teeth
cracked
partial
dental
plate
rendering
unusable
several
months
hudson
sued
three
corrections
officers
federal
district
alleging
violation
eighth
amendment
prohibition
cruel
unusual
punishments
seeking
compensatory
damages
parties
consented
disposition
case
magistrate
found
mcmillian
woods
used
force
need
mezo
expressly
condoned
actions
app
magistrate
awarded
hudson
damages
appeals
fifth
circuit
reversed
held
inmates
alleging
use
excessive
force
violation
eighth
amendment
must
prove
significant
injury
resulting
directly
use
force
clearly
excessive
need
excessiveness
objectively
unreasonable
action
constituted
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
id
determined
respondents
use
force
objectively
unreasonable
force
required
furthermore
conduct
mcmillian
woods
qualified
clearly
excessive
occasioned
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
ibid
however
hudson
prevail
eighth
amendment
claim
injuries
minor
required
medical
attention
ibid
granted
certiorari
determine
whether
significant
injury
requirement
applied
appeals
accords
constitution
dictate
cruel
unusual
punishment
shall
inflicted
ii
whitley
albers
principal
question
us
legal
standard
govern
eighth
amendment
claim
inmate
shot
guard
prison
riot
based
answer
settled
rule
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
constitutes
cruel
unusual
punishment
forbidden
eighth
amendment
quoting
ingraham
wright
internal
quotation
omitted
necessary
establish
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
said
varies
according
nature
alleged
constitutional
violation
example
appropriate
inquiry
inmate
alleges
prison
officials
failed
attend
serious
medical
needs
whether
officials
exhibited
deliberate
indifference
see
estelle
gamble
standard
appropriate
state
responsibility
provide
inmates
medical
care
ordinarily
conflict
competing
administrative
concerns
whitley
supra
contrast
officials
confronted
prison
disturbance
must
balance
threat
unrest
poses
inmates
prison
workers
administrators
visitors
harm
inmates
may
suffer
guards
use
force
despite
weight
competing
concerns
corrections
officials
must
make
decisions
haste
pressure
frequently
without
luxury
second
chance
accordingly
concluded
whitley
application
deliberate
indifference
standard
inappropriate
authorities
use
force
put
prison
disturbance
instead
question
whether
measure
taken
inflicted
unnecessary
wanton
pain
suffering
ultimately
turns
whether
force
applied
good
faith
effort
maintain
restore
discipline
maliciously
sadistically
purpose
causing
harm
quoting
johnson
glick
cert
denied
sub
nom
john
johnson
many
concerns
underlying
holding
whitley
arise
whenever
guards
use
force
keep
order
whether
prison
disturbance
riot
lesser
disruption
corrections
officers
must
balance
need
maintain
restore
discipline
force
risk
injury
inmates
situations
may
require
prison
officials
act
quickly
decisively
likewise
implicate
principle
rison
administrators
accorded
deference
adoption
execution
policies
practices
judgment
needed
preserve
internal
order
discipline
maintain
institutional
security
quoting
bell
wolfish
recognition
similarities
hold
whenever
prison
officials
stand
accused
using
excessive
physical
force
violation
cruel
unusual
punishments
clause
core
judicial
inquiry
set
whitley
whether
force
applied
good
faith
effort
maintain
restore
discipline
maliciously
sadistically
cause
harm
extending
whitley
application
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
standard
allegations
excessive
force
works
innovation
derived
whitley
test
one
articulated
judge
friendly
johnson
glick
supra
case
arising
prisoner
claim
beaten
harassed
guard
moreover
many
courts
appeals
already
apply
whitley
standard
allegations
excessive
force
outside
riot
situation
see
corselli
coughlin
miller
leathers
en
banc
cert
denied
haynes
marshall
stenzel
ellis
brown
smith
see
unwin
campbell
rejecting
application
whitley
standard
absent
actual
disturbance
whitley
approach
extent
injury
suffered
inmate
one
factor
may
suggest
whether
use
force
plausibly
thought
necessary
particular
situation
instead
evinced
wantonness
respect
unjustified
infliction
harm
tantamount
knowing
willingness
occur
whitley
determining
whether
use
force
wanton
unnecessary
may
also
proper
evaluate
need
application
force
relationship
need
amount
force
used
threat
reasonably
perceived
responsible
officials
efforts
made
temper
severity
forceful
response
ibid
absence
serious
injury
therefore
relevant
eighth
amendment
inquiry
end
respondents
nonetheless
assert
significant
injury
requirement
sort
imposed
fifth
circuit
mandated
termed
objective
component
eighth
amendment
analysis
see
wilson
seiter
wilson
extended
deliberate
indifference
standard
applied
eighth
amendment
claims
involving
medical
care
claims
conditions
confinement
taking
step
suggested
subjective
aspect
eighth
amendment
claim
concerned
distinguished
objective
facet
claim
thus
courts
considering
prisoner
claim
must
ask
officials
act
ed
sufficiently
culpable
state
mind
alleged
wrongdoing
objectively
harmful
enough
establish
constitutional
violation
respect
objective
component
eighth
amendment
violation
wilson
announced
new
rule
instead
decision
suggested
relationship
requirements
applicable
different
types
eighth
amendment
claims
necessary
show
sufficient
harm
purposes
cruel
unusual
punishments
clause
depends
upon
claim
issue
two
reasons
first
general
requirement
eighth
amendment
claimant
allege
prove
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
applied
due
regard
differences
kind
conduct
eighth
amendment
objection
lodged
whitley
supra
second
eighth
amendment
prohibition
cruel
unusual
punishments
draw
meaning
evolving
standards
decency
mark
progress
maturing
society
admits
absolute
limitations
rhodes
chapman
quoting
trop
dulles
plurality
opinion
objective
component
eighth
amendment
claim
therefore
contextual
responsive
contemporary
standards
decency
estelle
supra
instance
extreme
deprivations
required
make
claim
routine
discomfort
part
penalty
criminal
offenders
pay
offenses
society
rhodes
supra
deprivations
denying
minimal
civilized
measure
life
necessities
sufficiently
grave
form
basis
eighth
amendment
violation
wilson
supra
quoting
rhodes
supra
internal
citation
omitted
similar
analysis
applies
medical
needs
society
expect
prisoners
unqualified
access
health
care
deliberate
indifference
medical
needs
amounts
eighth
amendment
violation
needs
serious
see
estelle
gamble
excessive
force
context
society
expectations
different
prison
officials
maliciously
sadistically
use
force
cause
harm
contemporary
standards
decency
always
violated
see
whitley
supra
true
whether
significant
injury
evident
otherwise
eighth
amendment
permit
physical
punishment
matter
diabolic
inhuman
inflicting
less
arbitrary
quantity
injury
result
unacceptable
drafters
eighth
amendment
today
see
estelle
supra
proscribing
torture
barbarous
punishment
primary
concern
drafters
eighth
amendment
wilkerson
utah
safe
affirm
punishments
torture
others
line
unnecessary
cruelty
forbidden
eighth
amendment
say
every
malevolent
touch
prison
guard
gives
rise
federal
cause
action
see
johnson
glick
every
push
shove
even
may
later
seem
unnecessary
peace
judge
chambers
violates
prisoner
constitutional
rights
eighth
amendment
prohibition
cruel
unusual
punishments
necessarily
excludes
constitutional
recognition
de
minimis
uses
physical
force
provided
use
force
sort
repugnant
conscience
mankind
whitley
quoting
estelle
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
case
fifth
circuit
found
hudson
claim
untenable
injuries
minor
yet
blows
directed
hudson
caused
bruises
swelling
loosened
teeth
cracked
dental
plate
de
minimis
eighth
amendment
purposes
extent
hudson
injuries
thus
provides
basis
dismissal
claim
dissent
theory
wilson
requires
inmate
alleges
excessive
use
force
show
serious
injury
addition
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
misapplies
wilson
ignores
body
eighth
amendment
jurisprudence
already
suggested
question
wilson
hether
prisoner
claiming
conditions
confinement
constitute
cruel
unusual
punishment
must
show
culpable
state
mind
part
prison
officials
state
mind
required
wilson
supra
wilson
presented
neither
allegation
excessive
force
issue
relating
dubbed
objective
component
eighth
amendment
claim
wilson
touch
matters
course
summarizing
prior
holdings
beginning
estelle
gamble
supra
estelle
noted
first
applied
cruel
unusual
punishments
clause
deprivations
specifically
part
prisoner
sentence
wilson
supra
might
expected
primacy
estelle
stated
principle
underlying
cases
discussed
wilson
punishments
incompatible
evolving
standards
decency
mark
progress
maturing
society
involv
ing
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
repugnant
eighth
amendment
estelle
supra
internal
quotations
omitted
rule
dissent
reject
respect
objective
component
eighth
amendment
claim
however
wilson
suggested
departure
estelle
progeny
dissent
argument
claims
based
excessive
force
claims
based
conditions
confinement
different
kind
post
likewise
unfounded
far
rejecting
whitley
insight
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
standard
must
applied
regard
nature
alleged
eighth
amendment
violation
wilson
adopted
see
wilson
otherwise
constitutional
touchstone
whether
punishment
cruel
unusual
deny
dissent
difference
punching
prisoner
face
serving
unappetizing
food
ignore
concepts
dignity
civilized
standards
humanity
decency
animate
eighth
amendment
estelle
supra
quoting
jackson
bishop
respondents
argue
aside
significant
injury
test
applied
fifth
circuit
conduct
constitute
eighth
amendment
violation
isolated
unauthorized
brief
respondents
beating
hudson
contend
arose
personal
dispute
correctional
security
officers
prisoner
prison
policy
ibid
respondents
invoke
reasoning
courts
held
use
force
prison
officers
circumstances
beyond
scope
punishment
prohibited
eighth
amendment
see
johnson
glick
supra
lthough
spontaneous
attack
guard
cruel
hope
unusual
fit
ordinary
concept
punishment
george
evans
single
unauthorized
assault
guard
constitute
cruel
unusual
punishment
see
duckworth
franzen
guard
decided
supplement
prisoner
official
punishment
beating
punishment
cert
denied
take
position
respondents
legal
argument
find
inapposite
record
appeals
left
intact
magistrate
determination
violence
issue
case
isolated
assault
app
indeed
testimony
mcmillian
woods
beat
another
prisoner
shortly
finished
hudson
ibid
extent
respondents
rely
unauthorized
nature
acts
make
claim
addressed
fifth
circuit
presented
question
granted
certiorari
accordingly
moreover
respondents
ignore
magistrate
finding
lieutenant
mezo
acting
supervisor
expressly
condoned
use
force
instance
app
judgment
appeals
reversed
justice
stevens
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
absent
special
circumstances
however
less
demanding
standard
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
applied
estelle
gamble
quoting
gregg
georgia
opinion
stewart
powell
stevens
jj
see
unwin
campbell
opinion
campbell
institutional
security
stake
officials
license
use
force
limited
succeed
plaintiff
need
prove
malicious
sadistic
intent
see
also
wyatt
delaney
approach
consistent
admonition
whitley
standard
used
one
gives
due
regard
differences
kind
conduct
eighth
amendment
objection
lodged
case
prison
disturbance
need
use
force
since
plaintiff
already
restraints
app
prison
guards
attack
upon
petitioner
resulted
infliction
unnecessary
wanton
pain
although
think
reliance
malicious
sadistic
standard
misplaced
agree
even
demanding
standard
met
accordingly
concur
parts
ii
ii
ii
opinion
judgment
justice
blackmun
concurring
judgment
dissent
whitley
albers
join
extension
whitley
standard
allegations
excessive
force
even
outside
context
prison
riot
nevertheless
otherwise
join
solid
opinion
judgment
eighth
amendment
require
showing
significant
injury
excessive
force
context
write
separately
highlight
two
concerns
addressed
opinion
citing
rising
caseloads
respondents
represented
attorney
general
louisiana
joined
texas
hawaii
nevada
wyoming
florida
amici
curiae
suggest
significant
injury
requirement
necessary
curb
number
filings
prison
inmates
informed
significant
injury
requirement
effective
fifth
circuit
helping
control
docket
management
problems
brief
texas
hawaii
nevada
wyoming
florida
amici
curiae
audacious
approach
eighth
amendment
assumes
interpretation
explicit
constitutional
protection
guided
pure
policy
preferences
paring
prisoner
petitions
perhaps
judicial
overload
appropriate
concern
determining
whether
statutory
standing
sue
conferred
upon
certain
plaintiffs
see
associated
general
contractors
california
carpenters
identifying
rules
circumscribing
persons
entitled
sue
clayton
act
blue
chip
stamps
manor
drug
stores
identifying
judicial
policy
considerations
limiting
standing
securities
exchange
act
inherently
concern
appropriate
role
interpreting
contours
substantive
constitutional
right
since
burden
courts
presumably
worth
bearing
prisoner
suit
merit
concern
aptly
termed
conclusion
suits
simply
without
merit
one
experience
federal
bench
teaches
contrary
moreover
particular
classes
cases
nominated
exclusion
federal
courthouse
might
look
first
cases
federal
law
sensitively
issue
rather
fundamental
constitutional
rights
stake
right
file
legal
redress
courts
valuable
prisoner
citizen
indeed
prisoner
valuable
inasmuch
one
convicted
serious
crime
imprisoned
usually
divested
franchise
right
file
action
stands
words
yick
wo
hopkins
fundamental
political
right
preservative
rights
today
ruling
event
open
floodgates
filings
prison
inmates
statute
prisoners
alone
among
claimants
required
exhaust
administrative
remedies
see
stat
patsy
board
regents
florida
moreover
prison
officials
entitled
determination
trial
whether
acted
objectively
reasonable
manner
thereby
entitling
qualified
immunity
defense
procunier
navarette
see
also
harlow
fitzgerald
unsubstantiated
allegations
malice
insufficient
overcome
pretrial
qualified
immunity
additionally
federal
district
authorized
dismiss
prisoner
complaint
forma
pauperis
satisfied
action
frivolous
malicious
measures
adequate
control
problems
might
result
meritless
prisoner
claims
ii
read
anything
opinion
limit
injury
cognizable
eighth
amendment
physical
injury
hard
imagine
inflictions
psychological
harm
without
corresponding
physical
harm
might
prove
cruel
unusual
punishment
see
wisniewski
kennard
guard
placing
revolver
inmate
mouth
threatening
blow
prisoner
head
cert
denied
issue
presented
hudson
allege
feared
beating
incident
repeated
caused
anxiety
depression
see
app
makes
clear
eighth
amendment
prohibits
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
rather
injury
ante
pain
ordinary
meaning
surely
includes
notion
psychological
harm
unaware
precedent
effect
psychological
pain
cognizable
constitutional
purposes
anything
precedent
contrary
see
sierra
club
morton
recognizing
article
iii
standing
aesthetic
injury
brown
board
education
identifying
schoolchildren
feelings
psychological
inferiority
segregation
public
schools
sure
opinion
intimates
ante
de
minimis
nonmeasurable
pain
actionable
eighth
amendment
psychological
pain
de
minimis
psychological
pain
often
may
clinically
diagnosed
quantified
well
established
methods
ordinary
tort
context
damages
pain
suffering
regularly
awarded
doubt
read
physical
pain
physical
injury
requirement
eighth
amendment
less
pernicious
without
foundation
significant
injury
requirement
reject
today
justice
thomas
justice
scalia
joins
dissenting
fifth
circuit
apply
correct
legal
test
determining
petitioner
claim
eighth
amendment
rights
cruel
unusual
punishment
clause
violated
result
single
incident
force
respondents
cause
significant
injury
magistrate
found
facts
case
emphasized
petitioner
injuries
minor
app
three
judges
fifth
circuit
heard
case
appeal
disturb
assessment
challenged
sole
issue
case
comes
us
legal
one
must
prisoner
claims
subjected
cruel
unusual
punishment
establish
minimum
suffered
significant
injury
today
responds
negative
broadly
asserts
unnecessary
wanton
use
physical
force
prisoner
automatically
amounts
cruel
unusual
punishment
whenever
de
minimis
force
involved
even
de
minimis
use
force
goes
declare
inflicts
cruel
unusual
punishment
repugnant
conscience
mankind
ante
internal
quotations
omitted
extent
prisoner
injured
force
indeed
whether
injured
view
irrelevant
view
use
force
causes
insignificant
harm
prisoner
may
immoral
may
tortious
may
criminal
may
even
remediable
provisions
federal
constitution
cruel
unusual
punishment
concluding
contrary
today
goes
far
beyond
precedents
recent
years
cruel
unusual
punishment
clause
deemed
apply
deprivations
inflicted
part
sentence
crime
generations
judges
commentators
regarded
eighth
amendment
applying
torturous
punishments
meted
statutes
sentencing
judges
generally
hardship
might
befall
prisoner
incarceration
weems
extensively
chronicled
background
amendment
discussing
english
antecedents
adoption
congress
construction
interpretation
analogous
provisions
state
courts
nowhere
weems
even
hint
clause
might
regulate
criminal
sentences
treatment
prisoners
scholarly
commentary
also
viewed
clause
governing
punishments
part
sentence
see
cooley
constitutional
limitations
certainly
difficult
determine
precisely
meant
cruel
unusual
punishments
probably
punishment
declared
statute
offence
punishable
way
common
law
regarded
cruel
unusual
constitutional
sense
probably
new
statutory
offence
may
punished
extent
mode
permitted
common
law
offences
similar
nature
degrading
punishments
state
become
obsolete
existing
constitution
adopted
think
may
well
held
forbidden
cruel
unusual
emphasis
added
see
also
story
commentaries
constitution
surely
prison
congenial
place
early
years
republic
today
judges
commentators
naive
unaware
often
harsh
conditions
prison
life
rather
simply
conceive
eighth
amendment
protecting
inmates
harsh
treatment
thus
historically
lower
courts
routinely
rejected
prisoner
grievances
explaining
courts
role
regulating
prison
life
well
settled
function
courts
superintend
treatment
discipline
prisoners
penitentiaries
deliver
imprisonment
illegally
confined
stroud
swope
cert
denied
see
also
sutton
settle
per
curiam
cert
denied
ex
rel
atterbury
ragen
cert
denied
banning
looney
per
curiam
sarshik
sanford
years
eighth
amendment
adopted
first
applied
prisoner
complaint
deprivation
suffered
prison
estelle
gamble
made
clear
estelle
eighth
amendment
plays
limited
role
regulating
prison
administration
case
involved
claim
prison
doctors
inadequately
attended
inmate
medical
needs
rejected
claim
inmate
failed
allege
acts
omissions
sufficiently
harmful
evidence
deliberate
indifference
serious
medical
needs
emphasis
added
outset
thus
specified
eighth
amendment
apply
every
deprivation
even
every
unnecessary
deprivation
suffered
prisoner
narrow
class
deprivations
involving
serious
injury
inflicted
prison
officials
acting
culpable
state
mind
since
described
twin
elements
objective
subjective
components
eighth
amendment
prison
claim
see
wilson
seiter
never
found
violation
eighth
amendment
prison
context
inmate
failed
establish
either
elements
rhodes
chapman
instance
upheld
practice
placing
two
inmates
single
cell
ground
injury
alleged
insufficiently
serious
prison
conditions
deny
inmate
minimal
civilized
measure
life
necessities
said
considered
cruel
unusual
punishment
similarly
whitley
albers
held
guard
violate
eighth
amendment
shot
inmate
prison
riot
acted
sufficiently
culpable
state
mind
official
uses
force
quell
riot
said
violate
eighth
amendment
unless
acts
maliciously
sadistically
purpose
causing
harm
quoting
johnson
glick
friendly
cert
denied
sub
nom
john
johnson
synthesized
eighth
amendment
prison
jurisprudence
last
term
wilson
supra
inmate
alleged
poor
conditions
confinement
per
se
amounted
cruel
unusual
punishment
argued
required
addition
establish
officials
acted
culpably
rejected
argument
emphasizing
inmate
seeking
establish
prison
deprivation
amounts
cruel
unusual
punishment
always
must
satisfy
objective
component
deprivation
sufficiently
serious
subjective
component
officials
act
sufficiently
culpable
state
mind
eighth
amendment
necessary
components
neither
suffices
subjective
objective
components
course
implicit
traditional
eighth
amendment
jurisprudence
focuses
penalties
meted
statutes
sentencing
judges
thus
state
pass
statute
ordering
convicted
felons
broken
wheel
separately
inquire
whether
legislature
acted
deliberate
indifference
since
statute
intentional
act
necessarily
satisfies
even
higher
threshold
likewise
inquiry
whether
deprivation
objectively
serious
encompassed
within
determination
whether
cruel
unusual
cut
eighth
amendment
loose
historical
moorings
applied
broad
range
prison
deprivations
found
appropriate
make
explicit
limitations
described
estelle
rhodes
whitley
wilson
pain
inflicted
formally
meted
punishment
statute
sentencing
judge
mental
element
must
attributed
inflicting
officer
qualify
wilson
emphasis
original
thus
subjective
component
similarly
deprivations
sorts
essence
imprisonment
made
explicit
serious
deprivation
requirement
ensure
eighth
amendment
transfer
wholesale
regulation
prison
life
executive
officials
judges
wilson
described
inquiry
mandated
objective
component
deprivation
sufficiently
serious
emphasis
added
formulation
plainly
reveals
prior
assumption
serious
deprivation
always
required
analysis
task
given
case
determine
whether
challenged
deprivation
sufficiently
serious
interpretation
today
determine
whether
serious
deprivation
required
given
estelle
rhodes
whitley
wilson
one
might
assumed
little
difficulty
answering
question
presented
case
upholding
fifth
circuit
significant
injury
requirement
instead
announces
objective
component
eighth
amendment
claim
contextual
responsive
contemporary
standards
decency
ante
internal
quotation
omitted
context
claims
alleging
excessive
use
physical
force
asserts
serious
deprivation
requirement
satisfied
serious
deprivation
prison
officials
maliciously
sadistically
use
force
cause
harm
contemporary
standards
decency
always
violated
ibid
ascertaining
prison
officials
state
mind
words
relevant
inquiry
deciding
whether
cases
involve
cruel
unusual
punishment
view
approach
unwarranted
unfortunate
break
eighth
amendment
prison
jurisprudence
purports
derive
answer
case
whitley
sum
substance
eighth
amendment
violation
asserts
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
ante
quoting
whitley
formulation
advantage
perspective
eliminating
objective
component
noted
however
dispute
whitley
concerned
subjective
component
prisoner
shot
subjected
objectively
serious
injury
whitley
say
today
objective
component
contextual
eighth
amendment
claim
may
succeed
prisoner
seriously
injured
rather
whitley
stands
proposition
assuming
existence
objectively
serious
deprivation
culpability
official
state
mind
depends
context
acts
whitley
teaches
assuming
conduct
harmful
enough
satisfy
objective
component
eighth
amendment
claim
see
rhodes
chapman
whether
characterized
wanton
depends
upon
constraints
facing
official
wilson
supra
emphasis
modified
whether
officials
subject
prisoner
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
simply
one
way
describe
state
mind
inquiry
issue
whitley
wilson
made
clear
inquiry
necessary
sufficient
prisoner
seeks
show
subjected
cruel
unusual
punishment
perhaps
compensate
elimination
objective
component
excessive
force
cases
simultaneously
makes
harder
prisoners
establish
subjective
component
explained
wilson
deliberate
indifference
baseline
mental
state
required
establish
eighth
amendment
violation
departure
baseline
justified
whitley
prison
officials
act
response
emergency
situations
conduct
characterized
wanton
unless
taken
maliciously
sadistically
purpose
causing
harm
internal
quotation
omitted
today
extends
heightened
mental
state
applied
whitley
excessive
force
cases
even
competing
institutional
concerns
present
simply
asserts
concerns
underlying
holding
whitley
arise
whenever
guards
use
force
keep
order
ante
emphasis
added
agree
many
excessive
force
cases
arise
guards
attempts
keep
order
case
basis
petitioner
eighth
amendment
claim
guards
hit
need
use
force
use
excessive
physical
force
means
invariably
fact
perhaps
even
predominantly
accompanied
malicious
sadistic
state
mind
see
justification
applying
extraordinary
whitley
standard
excessive
force
cases
without
regard
constraints
facing
prison
officials
unwarranted
extension
whitley
suppose
driven
implausibility
saying
minor
injuries
imposed
upon
prisoners
anything
less
malicious
sadistic
state
mind
amount
cruel
unusual
punishment
attempts
distinguish
cases
expressly
resting
upon
objective
component
equally
unconvincing
noted
required
extreme
deprivation
cases
challenging
conditions
confinement
rhodes
chapman
objectively
serious
deprivation
required
explanation
routine
discomfort
part
penalty
criminal
offenders
pay
offenses
society
ante
quoting
rhodes
supra
quite
gap
routine
discomfort
denial
minimal
civilized
measure
life
necessities
required
establish
eighth
amendment
violation
view
society
standards
decency
violated
anything
short
uncivilized
conditions
confinement
matter
malicious
mental
state
officials
involved
automatically
violated
malicious
use
force
regardless
whether
even
causes
injury
puzzling
see
reason
society
standards
decency
readily
offended
officials
culpable
state
mind
subject
prisoner
deprivation
one
discrete
occasion
subject
continuous
deprivations
time
anything
think
deprivation
inflicted
continuously
long
period
greater
concern
society
deprivation
inflicted
one
particular
occasion
attempted
distinction
estelle
also
unpersuasive
society
expect
prisoners
unqualified
access
health
care
deliberate
indifference
medical
needs
amounts
eighth
amendment
violation
needs
serious
ante
view
society
similarly
expectation
prisoners
unqualified
freedom
force
since
forcibly
keeping
prisoners
detention
prisons
seriousness
injury
matter
doctors
maliciously
decide
treat
inmate
guards
maliciously
decide
strike
bottom
course
conclusive
way
refute
assertions
society
contemporary
notions
decency
precisely
long
insisted
determinations
whether
punishment
cruel
unusual
informed
objective
factors
maximum
possible
extent
rhodes
supra
internal
quotations
omitted
attempts
justify
departure
precedent
saying
showing
serious
injury
required
eighth
amendment
permit
physical
punishment
matter
diabolic
inhuman
inflicting
less
arbitrary
quantity
injury
ante
statement
view
reveals
central
flaw
reasoning
iabolic
inhuman
punishments
definition
inflict
serious
injury
say
injury
must
always
physical
many
things
beating
rubber
truncheon
water
torture
electric
shock
incessant
noise
reruns
space
may
cause
agony
occur
yet
leave
enduring
injury
state
free
inflict
pains
without
cause
long
careful
leave
marks
williams
boles
surely
prisoner
alleges
prison
officials
tortured
device
like
notorious
tucker
telephone
described
justice
blackmun
ante
alleged
serious
injury
petitioner
alleged
deprivation
type
injuries
alleged
entirely
physical
found
minor
furthermore
characterize
serious
injury
requirement
arbitrary
explain
eliminated
particular
context
remains
applicable
prison
deprivations
sure
always
obvious
injuries
serious
similarly
always
obvious
medical
needs
serious
conditions
confinement
deny
minimal
civilized
measure
life
necessities
determinations
however
required
eighth
amendment
prohibits
punishments
cruel
unusual
explained
think
precedents
clearly
establish
prisoner
seeking
prove
subjected
cruel
unusual
punishment
must
always
show
suffered
serious
deprivation
taken
word
unnecessary
wanton
infliction
pain
upon
prisoner
per
se
amounts
cruel
unusual
punishment
implications
today
opinion
sweeping
formulation
replaces
objective
component
described
prior
cases
necessity
component
many
prison
deprivations
however
necessary
least
meaningful
definition
word
thus
today
analysis
rhodes
wrongly
decided
surely
inmates
necessary
fulfill
state
penal
mission
fact
prison
case
designed
individual
cells
simply
overcrowded
rejected
prisoners
claim
rhodes
determined
necessary
deprivations
alleged
sufficiently
serious
state
claim
cruel
unusual
punishment
today
necessity
deprivation
apparently
relevant
inquiry
beyond
wantonness
official
conduct
approach
view
extends
eighth
amendment
beyond
reasonable
limits
ii
today
expansion
cruel
unusual
punishment
clause
beyond
bounds
history
precedent
suspect
yet
another
manifestation
pervasive
view
federal
constitution
must
address
ills
society
abusive
behavior
prison
guards
deplorable
conduct
properly
evokes
outrage
contempt
mean
invariably
unconstitutional
eighth
amendment
turned
national
code
prison
regulation
reject
notion
infliction
concededly
minor
injuries
considered
either
cruel
unusual
punishment
much
less
cruel
unusual
punishment
say
amounts
acceptable
conduct
rather
recognize
primary
responsibility
preventing
punishing
conduct
rests
federal
constitution
laws
regulations
various
petitioner
apparently
seek
redress
injuries
state
law
respondents
concede
available
state
remedies
constitutionally
adequate
petitioner
claim
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
cf
davidson
cannon
hudson
palmer
parratt
taylor
agree
respondents
appropriate
appropriately
limited
federal
constitutional
inquiry
case
conclude
precedents
prisoner
seeking
establish
subjected
cruel
unusual
punishment
must
always
show
suffered
serious
injury
affirm
judgment
fifth
circuit
footnotes
granting
petitioner
relief
eighth
amendment
claim
leaves
open
issue
whether
isolated
unauthorized
acts
punishment
course
critical
question
future
cases
type
ultimately
decide
isolated
unauthorized
acts
punishment
today
decision
dead
letter
anomaly
simply
highlights
artificiality
applying
eighth
amendment
prisoner
grievances
whether
caused
random
misdeeds
prison
officials
official
policy
believe
substantive
difference
serious
deprivation
requirement
found
precedents
fifth
circuit
significant
injury
requirement
moreover
distinguishing
case
conditions
cases
resurrects
distinction
repudiated
unsupportable
principle
unworkable
practice
wilson
seiter
officials
use
force
prisoner
whether
every
day
condition
confinement
unwise
view
make
existence
serious
deprivation
requirement
depend
whether
particular
claim
characterized
one
challenging
condition
one
challenging
specific
act
cf
mccarthy
bronson
onditions
confinement
include
challenges
ongoing
prison
conditions
also
challenges
isolated
incidents
excessive
force
part
distinction
cases
challenging
ongoing
conditions
challenging
specific
acts
alleged
misconduct
often
difficult
identify
according
respondents
louisiana
state
courts
open
prisoners
purpose
suing
prison
personnel
caused
unjustified
wrongs
example
see
parker
state
la
cert
denied
anderson
phelps
cir
mcgee
state
cir
writ
denied
la
neathery
state
cir
shields
state
corrections
cir
writ
denied
la
craft
state
cir
writ
denied
la
cert
denied
lewis
listi
cir
bastida
state
cir
adams
state
cir
julian
state
cir
nedd
state
la
cert
denied
mack
state
cir
writ
denied
la
walden
state
cir
writ
denied
la
white
phelps
cir
hampton
state
cir
davis
state
cir
betsch
state
cir
writ
refused
la
williams
state
cir
jones
state
cir
writ
refused
la
walker
state
cir
writ
denied
la
raney
state
cir
bay
maggio
cir
brief
respondents