Case: Heredia v. Landreman

3:19-cv-00338 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin

Filed Date: April 30, 2019

Closed Date: Nov. 2, 2022

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This is a case challenging Wisconsin's application of life-with-parole sentences for juvenile offenders. On April 30, 2019, the plaintiffs, individuals who were sentenced to life with the possibility of parole while they were juveniles, filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. The plaintiffs sued the Wisconsin Department of Corrections and the Wisconsin Parole Commission. Represented by private counsel and the ACLU of Wisconsin, the plain…

This is a case challenging Wisconsin's application of life-with-parole sentences for juvenile offenders. On April 30, 2019, the plaintiffs, individuals who were sentenced to life with the possibility of parole while they were juveniles, filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. The plaintiffs sued the Wisconsin Department of Corrections and the Wisconsin Parole Commission. Represented by private counsel and the ACLU of Wisconsin, the plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief requiring the defendants to allow them a meaningful opportunity to obtain release as of their parole eligibility date. The case was assigned to District Judge James D. Peterson.

The plaintiffs alleged that were repeatedly denied a meaningful opportunity for release on parole for life sentences they received as juveniles. The plaintiffs argued that these denials violated their Eighth Amendment right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment, their Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, and their right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. 

In early June 2019, the plaintiffs were permitted to proceed with their Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims. The plaintiffs were given two weeks to show cause for their Sixth Amendment claims. They successfully did so by arguing that, in repeatedly denying a meaningful opportunity for parole, the defendants were (1) increasing the plaintiffs’ mandatory minimum sentences based on facts not found by a jury and (2) increasing the plaintiffs maximum sentences without properly considering their efforts at rehabilitation.

In October 2020, Judge Peterson granted the plaintiffs’ motion to certify the lawsuit as a class action, defining the class as “[a]ll persons serving life sentences, or terms of years that exceed life expectancy, for crimes committed when they were children under the age of 18 in the custody of Wisconsin DOC and who are now, or will be, eligible for release under parole supervision.” 2020 WL 614652.

By early November 2020, four named plaintiffs had been released from prison and were dismissed as class representatives because their claims were moot. The plaintiffs asked for leave to amend their complaint to replace those who had been dismissed. Although Judge Peterson noted that the amended complaint was nearly twice the length of the original, the plaintiffs’ were permitted to amend the complaint with the understanding that the scope of the class and class claims were the same as what was approved for class certification.

In August 2021, the defendants asked for and received a stay, halting the parties’ discovery while Judge Peterson evaluated what impact the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Jones v. Mississippi, 141 S.Ct. 1307 (2021), would have on the plaintiffs’ claims.

On November 22, 2021, the court lifted the stay, concluding that Jones did not foreclose plaintiffs' claims "although it certainly d[id] nothing to advance" them.  It reasoned that Jones left room for plaintiffs to argue that youth must be considered in the parole process.  Further, because Jones suggested that the constitutional standards for juvenile offenders convicted of homicide may be different from the standards for juvenile offenders convicted of nonhomicide crimes, the court created subclasses for each group. Finally, plaintiffs withdrew and the court dismissed with prejudice plaintiffs’ claim that their maximum sentences were being increased based on "incorrigibility" findings in violation of the Sixth Amendment. 2021 WL 5446872.

On April 1, 2022 the defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. The defendants argued that the plaintiff's constitutional claims failed as a matter of law for several reasons. First, that Wisconsin's parole system did not violate the Eighth Amendment because no class member was sentenced to life without parole. Second, that Wisconsin's parole system did not violate the due process clause because the plaintiffs did not have a cognizable liberty interest in release on parole. Third, that Wisconsin's parole system did not violate the Sixth Amendment because Sixth Amendment protections do not apply to parole reviews. And finally, that even if the Supreme Court's juvenile sentencing cases applied in this context, parole-eligible class members were receiving regular and meaningful parole reviews.  That same day, plaintiffs filed a cross-motion for summary judgment on their claims.  

On November 2, 2022, the court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment and denied the plaintiffs' motion, entering judgment for defendants and closing the case. The court held that 1) the Eighth Amendment did not prohibit a parole board from considering the seriousness of the criminal offense when deciding whether to grant parole to a juvenile offender, 2) plaintiffs had not presented evidence that the commission categorically violated the Eighth Amendment rights of juvenile offenders, 3) denial of parole was not a deprivation of "liberty" within the meaning of the due process clause, and 4) the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial did not apply to fact finding for denial of parole. 2022 WL 16635179.

Summary Authors

Hannah Shilling (11/14/2021)

Jane Fisher (3/10/2022)

Rhea Sharma (5/3/2023)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/15022758/parties/heredia-victoriano-v-blythe-christopher/


Judge(s)
Attorney for Plaintiff

Anderson, Ellen (Wisconsin)

Brooks, Heather Holden (Wisconsin)

Conway, Carly S. (Wisconsin)

Donahoe, Christine Ann (Wisconsin)

Dupuis, Laurence J. (Wisconsin)

Attorney for Defendant

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case
1

3:19-cv-00338

Class Action Complaint

King v. Landreman

April 30, 2019

April 30, 2019

Complaint
3

3:19-cv-00338

Opinion and Order

King v. Landreman

June 4, 2019

June 4, 2019

Order/Opinion

2019 WL 2355545

37

3:19-cv-00338

Opinion and Order

King v. Landreman

May 18, 2020

May 18, 2020

Order/Opinion

2020 WL 2527061

53

3:19-cv-00338

Opinion and Order

King v. Landreman

Oct. 20, 2020

Oct. 20, 2020

Order/Opinion

2020 WL 6146542

113

3:19-cv-00338

Opinion and Order

Heredia v. Tate

Nov. 22, 2021

Nov. 22, 2021

Order/Opinion

2021 WL 5446872

176

3:19-cv-00338

Opinion and Order

Heredia v. Blythe

Nov. 2, 2022

Nov. 2, 2022

Order/Opinion

2022 WL 16635179

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/15022758/heredia-victoriano-v-blythe-christopher/

Last updated April 9, 2026, 5:37 a.m.

ECF Number Date Description Link
1 April 30, 2019

COMPLAINT against All Defendants, ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0758-2455164.), filed by All Plaintiffs, (Attachments: # 1 Summons - Douglas Drankiewicz, # 2 Summons - Mark Heise, # 3 Summons - Danielle LaCost, # 4 Summons - Steven Landreman, # 5 Summons - Kevin Carr, # 6 JS-44 Civil Cover Sheet) (Everts, Gregory) (Entered: 04/30/2019)

Clearinghouse
2 April 30, 2019

Initial Order directing plaintiffs' complaint be taken under advisement for screening. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter A. Oppeneer on 4/30/2019. (jef),(ps) (Entered: 04/30/2019)

RECAP
April 30, 2019

Add and Terminate Judges

April 30, 2019

Dummy Motion for In Forma Pauperis Screening

April 30, 2019

Case assigned to District Judge James D. Peterson and Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker. (jef),(ps)

April 30, 2019

Dummy Motion for PLRA Screening

April 30, 2019

Prison Litigation Reform Act (PRLA) Screening. (jef),(ps)

3 June 4, 2019

ORDER granting plaintiffs leave to proceed on claims under the Eighth Amendment and Due Process Clause. Plaintiffs may have until June 18, 2019, to show cause why their claim under the Sixth Amendment should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The court will defer service until it makes a decision on whether plaintiffs may proceed on their Sixth Amendment claim. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 6/4/2019. (jef),(ps) (Entered: 06/04/2019)

Clearinghouse
4 June 14, 2019

Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel by Maria Lyon re: Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek (Lyon, Maria),(ps) (Entered: 06/14/2019)

RECAP
5 June 18, 2019

Response to 3 Order to Show Cause Regarding Plaintiffs' Sixth Amendment Claims, by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. (Everts, Gregory),(ps) Modified on 6/19/2019 (nln). (Entered: 06/18/2019)

RECAP
6 June 25, 2019

ORDER granting plaintiffs leave to proceed on their claims that defendants are violating their rights under the Sixth Amendment, the Eighth Amendment, and the Fourteenth Amendment by denying them a meaningful opportunity to obtain release and considering facts that may be considered only by a jury.Plaintiffs are directed to serve their complaint on defendants in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 6/25/2019. (jef),(ps) (Entered: 06/25/2019)

RECAP
7 June 25, 2019

Summonses Issued as to Steven Landreman, et al. (Attachments: # 1 Summons as to Danielle LaCost, # 2 Summons as to Douglas Drankiewicz, # 3 Summons as to Kevin Carr, # 4 Summons as to Mark Heise) (jef),(ps) (Entered: 06/25/2019)

RECAP
8 June 28, 2019

Stipulation for Service and Deadline for Answering Complaint by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 06/28/2019)

RECAP
9 July 1, 2019

** TEXT ONLY ORDER **ORDER accepting 8 Stipulation for Service and Deadline for Answering Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 7/1/2019. (nln),(ps) (Entered: 07/01/2019)

RECAP
10 July 1, 2019

Notice of Appearance filed by Karla Z. Keckhaver and Lisa E. F. Kumfer for Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman. (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) Modified on 7/1/2019. (kwf) (Entered: 07/01/2019)

RECAP
July 1, 2019

Text Only Order

July 1, 2019

~Util - Set Deadlines/Hearings

11 Aug. 9, 2019

MOTION TO DISMISS Complaint or, in the Alternative, To Stay Proceedings by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman. (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) Modified on 8/12/2019. (lak) (Entered: 08/09/2019)

RECAP
12 Aug. 9, 2019

Brief in Support of 11 Motion to Dismiss Complaint or, in the Alternative, To Stay Proceedings by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman. (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) Modified on 8/12/2019. (lak) (Entered: 08/09/2019)

RECAP
Aug. 9, 2019

Set Briefing Deadlines

Aug. 9, 2019

Set Briefing Deadlines as to 11 MOTION TO DISMISS Complaint. Plaintiffs' Brief in Opposition due 8/30/2019. Defendants' Brief in Reply due 9/9/2019. (nln),(ps)

13 Aug. 15, 2019

Joint Motion to Amend Briefing Schedule on Motion to Dismiss or Stay Proceedings by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker. (Dupuis, Laurence),(ps) (Entered: 08/15/2019)

RECAP
14 Aug. 16, 2019

** TEXT ONLY ORDER **ORDER granting 13 Motion to Amend Briefing Schedule as to 11 Motion to Dismiss Complaint or, in the Alternative, To Stay Proceedings. Plaintiffs' Brief in Opposition due 9/23/2019. Defendants' Brief in Reply due 10/14/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 8/16/2019. (nln),(ps) (Entered: 08/16/2019)

RECAP
Aug. 16, 2019

Order on Motion to Amend Briefing Schedule

15 Sept. 6, 2019

Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel by Carly S. Conway re: Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek (Conway, Carly),(ps) (Entered: 09/06/2019)

RECAP
16 Sept. 23, 2019

Brief in Opposition by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek re: 11 Motion to Dismiss filed by Kevin Carr, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Douglas Drankiewicz, Steven Landreman (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 09/23/2019)

RECAP
17 Oct. 8, 2019

Notice of Supplemental Authority by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek re: 16 Brief in Opposition, 11 MOTION TO DISMISS Complaint or, in the Alternative, To Stay Proceedings, (Attachments: # 1 Decision in Flores v. Stanford) (Dupuis, Laurence),(ps) Modified on 10/9/2019. (lak) (Entered: 10/08/2019)

RECAP
18 Oct. 14, 2019

Brief in Reply by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman in Support of 11 Motion to Dismiss (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) (Entered: 10/14/2019)

RECAP
19 Nov. 1, 2019

Motion to Set a Scheduling Conference by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. (Proctor-Brown, Patrick),(ps) (Entered: 11/01/2019)

RECAP
20 Nov. 14, 2019

ORDER that Plaintiffs' motion to set a scheduling conference, Dkt. 19, is DENIED. Defendants' motion to dismiss the case, or, in the alternative, to stay the case, Dkt. 11, is DENIED as to the motion to dismiss and GRANTED as to the motion to stay. This case is STAYED pending a decision in Mathena v. Malvo, No. 18-217 (U.S.). Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 11/14/2019. (rks),(ps) (Entered: 11/14/2019)

RECAP
21 March 11, 2020

Motion to Stay or in the Alternative, Renew Motion to Dismiss by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman. (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) (Entered: 03/11/2020)

RECAP
March 11, 2020

Set Briefing Deadlines

March 11, 2020

Set Briefing Deadlines as to 21 Motion to Stay or in the Alternative, Renew Motion to Dismiss. Brief in Opposition due 3/18/2020. Brief in Reply due 3/23/2020. (nln/jmm),(ps)

22 March 18, 2020

Brief in Opposition by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek re: 21 Motion to Stay filed by Kevin Carr, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Douglas Drankiewicz, Steven Landreman (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 03/18/2020)

RECAP
23 March 19, 2020

Motion to Admit Stephanie M. Moon Pro Hac Vice. ( Pro Hac Vice fee $ 100 receipt number 0758-2648045.) by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker. (Moon, Stephanie),(ps) (Entered: 03/19/2020)

RECAP
24 March 19, 2020

** TEXT ONLY ORDER **ORDER granting 23 Motion to Admit Stephanie M. Moon Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter A. Oppeneer on 3/19/2020. (nln),(ps) (Entered: 03/19/2020)

RECAP
March 19, 2020

Order on Motion to Admit Pro Hac Vice

25 March 23, 2020

Brief in Reply by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman in Support of 21 Motion to Stay (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) (Entered: 03/23/2020)

RECAP
26 May 7, 2020

Notice of Appearance filed by Amy Lynn Lenz for Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. (Lenz, Amy),(ps) (Entered: 05/07/2020)

RECAP
27 May 7, 2020

Notice of Appearance filed by Amy Lynn Lenz for Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. (Lenz, Amy),(ps) (Entered: 05/07/2020)

RECAP
28 May 13, 2020

Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23 by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. Brief in Opposition due 6/3/2020. Brief in Reply due 6/15/2020. (Attachments: # 1 A-Motion for Class Certification) (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 05/13/2020)

RECAP
29 May 13, 2020

Brief in Support of 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 05/13/2020)

RECAP
30 May 13, 2020

Declaration of Patrick Proctor-Brown filed by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek re: 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 05/13/2020)

RECAP
31 May 13, 2020

Declaration of Carlos King filed by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek re: 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 05/13/2020)

RECAP
32 May 13, 2020

Declaration of Craig Sussek filed by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek re: 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 05/13/2020)

RECAP
33 May 13, 2020

Declaration of Thaddeus Karow filed by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek re: 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 05/13/2020)

RECAP
34 May 13, 2020

Declaration of James Price filed by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek re: 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 05/13/2020)

RECAP
35 May 13, 2020

Declaration of Victoriano Heredia filed by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek re: 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 05/13/2020)

RECAP
36 May 14, 2020

** TEXT ONLY ORDER **Plaintiffs have filed a motion for class certification, but this case is currently stayed, see Dkt. 20, so plaintiffs' motion is DENIED without prejudice. After the court resolves plaintiffs' request to lift the stay, the court will determine what steps to take next, including setting a new schedule, if necessary. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 5/14/2020. (nln),(ps) (Entered: 05/14/2020)

RECAP
May 14, 2020

~Util - Terminate Motions

May 14, 2020

Text Only Order

37 May 18, 2020

ORDER that Defendants' motion to continue the stay, Dkt. 21, is DENIED and stay is LIFTED. Plaintiffs' motion for class certification, Dkt. 28, is REVIVED. Defendants may have until June 8, 2020, to file an opposition brief; plaintiffs may have until June 18, 2020, to file a reply. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 5/18/2020. (rks),(ps) (Entered: 05/18/2020)

Clearinghouse
May 18, 2020

Set Pretrial or Status Conference

May 18, 2020

Set Telephone Pretrial or Status Conference: Telephone Scheduling Conference set for 6/19/2020 at 01:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker. Counsel for Plaintiff responsible for setting up the call to chambers at (608) 264-5153. (rks),(ps) Modified on 5/18/2020 (rks).

38 May 19, 2020

Notice of Appearance filed by Colin A Hector for Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman. (Hector, Colin),(ps) (Entered: 05/19/2020)

RECAP
39 June 1, 2020

ANSWER by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman. (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) (Entered: 06/01/2020)

RECAP
40 June 8, 2020

Brief in Opposition by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman re: 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, filed by Victoriano Heredia, Craig Alan Sussek, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) (Entered: 06/08/2020)

RECAP
41 June 8, 2020

Declaration of John Tate II filed by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman In Support of Defendant's Brief in Opposition re: 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, (Keckhaver, Karla) (Entered: 06/08/2020)

RECAP
42 June 8, 2020

Declaration of John Tate II filed by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Mark Heise, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman In Support of Defendants' Brief in Opposition re: 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C) (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) (Entered: 06/08/2020)

RECAP
43 June 16, 2020

Report of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 06/16/2020)

RECAP
44 June 18, 2020

Brief in Reply by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek in Support of 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 06/18/2020)

RECAP
45 June 18, 2020

Declaration of Patrick Proctor-Brown filed by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek re: 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23, (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A) (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 06/18/2020)

RECAP
46 June 22, 2020

Standing Order Relating to the Discovery of Electronically Stored Information in a Complex Civil Lawsuit. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 6/22/2020. (rks),(ps) (Entered: 06/22/2020)

RECAP
47 June 22, 2020

Pretrial Conference Order - Preliminary Pretrial Packet in cases assigned to District Judge James D. Peterson attached. Amendments to Pleadings due 8/3/2020. Dispositive Motions due 3/1/2021. Settlement Letters due 6/1/2021. Motions in Limine due 6/18/2021. Response to Motion due 7/2/2021. Final Pretrial Conference set for 7/21/2021 at 04:00 PM. Jury Selection and Trial set for 8/2/2021 at 09:00 AM. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 6/22/2020. (rks),(ps) (Entered: 06/22/2020)

RECAP
June 22, 2020

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker: Telephone Preliminary Pretrial Conference held on 6/19/2020 [:15] (cak),(ps)

June 22, 2020

Telephone Preliminary Pretrial Conference

48 July 8, 2020

Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel by Patrick John Proctor-Brown re: Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek of Attorney Joseph R. Santeler (Proctor-Brown, Patrick),(ps) (Entered: 07/08/2020)

RECAP
49 Aug. 13, 2020

Stipulated Motion for Protective Order by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 08/13/2020)

RECAP
50 Aug. 13, 2020

** TEXT ONLY ORDER **The parties' stipulated protective order is accepted and entered as the court's order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 8/13/2020. (nln),(ps) (Entered: 08/13/2020)

RECAP
Aug. 13, 2020

Order on Motion for Protective Order

51 Aug. 21, 2020

Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel by Asma Imtiazali Kadri re: Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek (Kadri, Asma),(ps) (Entered: 08/21/2020)

RECAP
52 Aug. 21, 2020

Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel by Hillary Nicole Vedvig re: Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek (Vedvig, Hillary),(ps) (Entered: 08/21/2020)

RECAP
53 Oct. 20, 2020

ORDER granting 28 Motion to Certify Class under Rule 23. Plaintiffs may have until November 3, 2020, to show cause why Carlos King, Thaddeus Karow, and Craig Alan Sussek shouldn't be dismissed from the case. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 10/20/2020. (lam),(ps) (Entered: 10/20/2020)

Clearinghouse
54 Oct. 30, 2020

Notice of Appearance filed by Jasmine Jade Monee Reed for Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. (Reed, Jasmine),(ps) (Entered: 10/30/2020)

RECAP
55 Oct. 30, 2020

Notice of Appearance filed by Daniel A. Kaplan for Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. (Kaplan, Daniel),(ps) (Entered: 10/30/2020)

RECAP
56 Nov. 3, 2020

Response to Order to Show Cause by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 11/03/2020)

RECAP
57 Nov. 3, 2020

** TEXT ONLY ORDER **In response to the court's order to show cause, Dkt. 53, plaintiffs concede that Carlos King, Thaddeus Karow, Craig Alan Sussek, and James Price should be dismissed because they have been released from prison. See Dkt. 56 . Accordingly, those four plaintiffs are DISMISSED because their claims are moot. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 11/03/2020. (nln),(ps) (Entered: 11/03/2020)

RECAP
Nov. 3, 2020

~Util - Add and Terminate Parties AND Text Only Order

58 Nov. 25, 2020

Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-Amended Complaint) (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 11/25/2020)

RECAP
59 Nov. 25, 2020

Stipulation for service and deadline for answering amended complaint by Plaintiffs Victoriano Heredia, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek. (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 11/25/2020)

RECAP
60 Nov. 25, 2020

** TEXT ONLY ORDER ** Plaintiffs have filed an unopposed motion to file an amended complaint, Dkt. 58, along with a stipulation that defendants may have until January 8, 2021, to file an answer, Dkt. 59 . The sole purpose identified by plaintiffs for amending the complaint is to name new plaintiffs to replace those who have been dismissed on mootness grounds. But for reasons they don't explain, the proposed amended complaint is nearly twice as long as the original. Plaintiffs' motion is GRANTED and the stipulation is APPROVED with the understanding that, despite the additional exposition, the scope of the class and the class claims in the amended complaint are identical to what was approved in the class certification order. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 11/25/2020. (lam),(ps) (Entered: 11/25/2020)

RECAP
Nov. 25, 2020

Text Only Order

61 Nov. 30, 2020

AMENDED COMPLAINT against Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, John Tate, Jennifer Kramer, Angela Hansen, filed by Victoriano Heredia, Dujuan Nash, Joseph Orosco, Barney Guarnero, Brian Pheil, Dontae Doyle, Jumar Jones, Deng Yang. (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 11/30/2020)

RECAP
62 Dec. 14, 2020

Joint Motion for Release of Class Members' Confidential Information by Plaintiffs Dontae Doyle, Barney Guarnero, Victoriano Heredia, Jumar Jones, Thaddeus Karow, Carlos King, Dujuan Nash, Joseph Orosco, Brian Pheil, James Price, Craig Alan Sussek, Deng Yang. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Final Notice, # 2 Exhibit B - Proposed Order Authorizing Disclosure of Class Members' Confidential Information) (Lenz, Amy),(ps) (Entered: 12/14/2020)

RECAP
63 Dec. 22, 2020

ORDER Authorizing Disclosure of Class Members Information. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 12/22/2020. (jef),(ps) (Entered: 12/22/2020)

RECAP
64 Dec. 30, 2020

Letter Requesting Docket Sheet by Terrance Prude. Requested docket sheet mailed to Terrance Prude. (aom),(ps) (Entered: 12/30/2020)

RECAP
65 Jan. 8, 2021

ANSWER to Amended Complaint by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Angela Hansen, Jennifer Kramer, John Tate. (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) (Entered: 01/08/2021)

RECAP
66 Jan. 18, 2021

Deposition of Chad J. Cabala taken on December 11, 2020 pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6). (Proctor-Brown, Patrick),(ps) Modified on 1/19/2021. (lak) (Entered: 01/18/2021)

RECAP
67 Jan. 18, 2021

Deposition of Angela Hansen taken on December 8, 2020 pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6). (Sealed Document) (Proctor-Brown, Patrick),(ps) (Entered: 01/18/2021)

RECAP
68 Jan. 18, 2021

Deposition of John Tate, II taken on December 9, 2020 pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6). (Sealed Document) (Proctor-Brown, Patrick),(ps) (Entered: 01/18/2021)

RECAP
69 Jan. 19, 2021

Motion to Compel the Production of Electronically Stored Information by Plaintiffs Dontae Doyle, Barney Guarnero, Victoriano Heredia, Jumar Jones, Dujuan Nash, Joseph Orosco, Brian Pheil, Deng Yang. Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker. (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 01/19/2021)

RECAP
70 Jan. 19, 2021

Declaration of Stephanie M. Moon filed by Plaintiffs Dontae Doyle, Barney Guarnero, Victoriano Heredia, Jumar Jones, Dujuan Nash, Joseph Orosco, Brian Pheil, Deng Yang re: 69 Motion to Compel, (Sealed Document) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A- Summary, # 2 Exhibit B- Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production to the Defendants, # 3 Exhibit C- Defendants' Responses to Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production, # 4 Exhibit D- October 1, 2020 Letter, # 5 Exhibit E- November 18, 2020 Letter, # 6 Exhibit F- September 2, 2020 Letter, # 7 Exhibit G- September 25, 2020 Letter, # 8 Exhibit H- October 19, 2020 E-mail, # 9 Exhibit I- October 28, 2020 E-mail, # 10 Exhibit J- November 13, 2020 Letter, # 11 Exhibit K- Parole Commission Action for Class Member Barney Guarnero, # 12 Exhibit L- December 14, 2020 Letter, # 13 Exhibit M- Parole Commission Action for Class Member Dujuan Nash, # 14 Exhibit N- Parole Commission Action for Class Member Dontae Doyle, # 15 Exhibit O- Parole Commission Action for Class Member Victoriano Heredia, # 16 Exhibit P- Parole Commission Action for Class Member Brian Pheil) (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 01/19/2021)

RECAP
71 Jan. 19, 2021

Redaction to 70 Declaration,,,, of Stephanie M. Moon in Support of Motion to Compel by Plaintiffs Dontae Doyle, Barney Guarnero, Victoriano Heredia, Jumar Jones, Dujuan Nash, Joseph Orosco, Brian Pheil, Deng Yang (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A- Summary, # 2 Exhibit B- Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production to the Defendants, # 3 Exhibit C- Defendants' Responses to Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production, # 4 Exhibit D- October 1, 2020 Letter, # 5 Exhibit E- November 18, 2020 Letter, # 6 Exhibit F- September 2, 2020 Letter, # 7 Exhibit G- September 25, 2020 Letter, # 8 Exhibit H- October 19, 2020 E-mail, # 9 Exhibit I- October 28, 2020 E-mail, # 10 Exhibit J- November 13, 2020 Letter, # 11 Exhibit K- Parole Commission Action for Class Member Barney Guarnero, # 12 Exhibit L- December 14, 2020 Letter, # 13 Exhibit M- Parole Commission Action for Class Member Dujuan Nash, # 14 Exhibit N- Parole Commission Action for Class Member Dontae Doyle, # 15 Exhibit O- Parole Commission Action for Class Member Victoriano Heredia, # 16 Exhibit P- Parole Commission Action for Class Member Brian Pheil) (Everts, Gregory),(ps) (Entered: 01/19/2021)

RECAP
Jan. 20, 2021

Set briefing as to 69 Motion to Compel the Production of Electronically Stored Information. Brief in Opposition due 2/3/2021. Brief in Reply due 2/10/2021. (jef),(ps)

Jan. 20, 2021

Set Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings

72 Jan. 25, 2021

Notice of Appearance of Hillary N. Vedvig filed by Hillary Nicole Vedvig for Plaintiffs Dontae Doyle, Barney Guarnero, Victoriano Heredia, Jumar Jones, Dujuan Nash, Joseph Orosco, Brian Pheil, Deng Yang. (Vedvig, Hillary),(ps) (Entered: 01/25/2021)

RECAP
73 Jan. 25, 2021

Notice of Appearance filed by Andrew Martin Meerkins for Plaintiffs Dontae Doyle, Barney Guarnero, Victoriano Heredia, Jumar Jones, Dujuan Nash, Joseph Orosco, Brian Pheil, Deng Yang. (Meerkins, Andrew),(ps) (Entered: 01/25/2021)

RECAP
74 Jan. 26, 2021

Notice of Appearance filed by Ellen Cranberg for Plaintiffs Dontae Doyle, Barney Guarnero, Victoriano Heredia, Jumar Jones, Dujuan Nash, Joseph Orosco, Brian Pheil, Deng Yang. (Cranberg, Ellen),(ps) (Entered: 01/26/2021)

RECAP
75 Feb. 3, 2021

Brief in Opposition by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Angela Hansen, Mark Heise, Jennifer Kramer, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman, John Tate re: 69 Motion to Compel, filed by Brian Pheil, Barney Guarnero, Deng Yang, Victoriano Heredia, Jumar Jones, Joseph Orosco, Dontae Doyle, Dujuan Nash (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) (Entered: 02/03/2021)

RECAP
76 Feb. 3, 2021

Declaration of Chad J. Cabala filed by Defendants Kevin Carr, Douglas Drankiewicz, Angela Hansen, Mark Heise, Jennifer Kramer, Danielle LaCost, Steven Landreman, John Tate re: 69 Motion to Compel, (Keckhaver, Karla),(ps) (Entered: 02/03/2021)

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory:

Wisconsin

Case Type(s):

Criminal Justice (Other)

Special Collection(s):

Juvenile Parole

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 30, 2019

Closing Date: Nov. 2, 2022

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

A class of “[a]ll persons serving life sentences, or terms of years that exceed life expectancy, for crimes committed when they were children under the age of 18 in the custody of Wisconsin DOC and who are now, or will be, eligible for release under parole supervision," divided into subclasses for persons convicted of homicide crimes and persons convicted of non-homicide crimes.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

ACLU Affiliates (any)

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

State

Wisconsin Department of Corrections

Wisconsin Parole Commission

Defendant Type(s):

Corrections

Jurisdiction-wide

Facility Type(s):

Government-run

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Due Process

Other Dockets:

Western District of Wisconsin 3:19-cv-00338

Available Documents:

Any published opinion

Complaint (any)

Non-settlement Outcome

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Relief Granted:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General/Misc.:

Juveniles

Recommended Citation