Proof of malicious prosecution
Daryl Dane Donohue v. United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- Daryl Dane Donohue asks the Supreme Court to review whether the Sixth Circuit's reasoning showed that his lawyer's inadequate help harmed him in violation of the Sixth Amendment, and whether a Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim requires proof of prosecutors' subjective malice or can rest on a lack of probable cause.
- Who it affects
- Donohue did not receive Supreme Court review of these issues; the denial did not decide whether his claims should succeed.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The case is listed as pending.
The filing raises two constitutional topics: a defendant’s right to effective legal help and a Fourth Amendment claim involving malicious prosecution.
Question presented
1. WHETHER THE FORM OF EXPRESSION FROM AN APPELLATE COURT IN DENIAL OF A DEFENDANT’S APPEAL ATTEMPT, WHICH OPENLY SATISFIES BOTH PRONGS OF THE “STRICKLAND STANDARD” (PERFORMANCE AND PREJUDICE), PROVING LEGAL COUNSEL OF RECORD PROVIDED SUBSTANDARD ASSISTANCE, AFFIRMS HOW A DEFENDANT’S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED BY WAY OF THE SIXTH AMENDMENT? 2. WHETHER A CLAIM FOR MALICIOUS PROSECUTION UNDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT REQUIRES INDEPENDENT PROOF OF SUBJECTIVE MALICE BY THE PROSECUTION OR WHETHER PROOF THE LEGAL PROCESS WAS INITIATED WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE IS ALONE SUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH A CONSTITUTIONAL TORT?
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
New analysis added
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Show 2 moreShow fewer
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.