Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): v. Pelzer, 240 F.3d 975 (11th Cir.2001). Accordingly, the question to ask is whether prison officials have been given fair warning that their actions or omissions are unconstitutional. Id. It has been clearly established in this Circuit for a long time that an inmate may not be held in prison beyond the end of his sentence. Whirl v. Kern, 407 F.2d 781 (5th Cir.1968), cert. denied 396 U.S. 901, 90 S.Ct. 210, 24 L.Ed.2d 177 (1969)(upholding liability under § 1983 against a jailer for continuing a prisoner’s incarceration for nine months); Cannon v. Macon County, 1 F.3d 1558, 1563 (11th Cir.1993) (denying qualified immunity defense and finding there was a clearly established right under the Fourteenth Amendment to not be falsely imprisoned); Douthit v. Jones, 619 F.2d 527 (5th Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>). These case clearly establish an inmate’s 
 Holding statements: (A) holding thirty day detention beyond the expiration of a sentence constitutes a deprivation of due process (B) holding that civil commitment for any purpose constitutes significant deprivation of liberty that requires due process protection (C) holding thirtyeight day preappearance detention violated due process (D) holding that detention of approximately eight months violated due process (E) holding that deprivation of property must conform to due process principles
Output (English): holding that deprivation of property must conform to due process principles