View source for Conn v. Gabbert

In '''''Conn v. Gabbert''''', 526 U.S. 286 (1999), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] held that a [[court]] evaluating a claim of [[qualified immunity]] "must first determine whether the [[plaintiff]] has alleged the deprivation of an actual constitutional right at all, and if so, proceed to determine whether that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation."

[[Chief Justice]] [[William Rehnquist]] wrote the opinion for the nearly unanimous Court.  He considered "whether a prosecutor violates an [[attorney]]'s [[Fourteenth Amendment]] right to practice his profession when the prosecutor causes the attorney to be searched at the same time his client is testifying before a grand jury" and held "that such conduct by a prosecutor does not violate an attorney's [[Fourteenth Amendment]] right to practice his profession."

[[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
[[Category:Qualified Immunity]]
[[Category:Section 1983]]