Sex dating in groveland california
When Hazle’s case went to trial, the district court judge ruled that, as a matter of law, Hazle’s constitutional rights had indeed been violated by the revocation of his parole and his resulting imprisonment for 100 additional days.
The judge instructed the jury that Hazle’s rights had been violated and that the jury’s job was simply to determine the amount of damages to which Hazle was entitled.
Hazle sued California state officials, his parole officer, and a private company named Westcare, which contracted with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations to provide drug treatment programs for parolees with drug-related convictions.
The jury returned with a verdict of no damages for the violation of Hazle’s constitutional rights.On appeal, the Ninth Circuit ruled that, as a matter of law, the jury was required to award Hazle monetary damages to compensate him for the violation of his constitutional rights and wrongful imprisonment.