§Why CasetextPricing

Prison Legal News v. Columbia County et al

Motion to Appear as Amicus Curiae .

10 Cited authorities

  1. Turner v. Safley

    482 U.S. 78 (1987)   Cited 10,157 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding a regulation unconstitutional after noting that the prison "pointed to nothing in the record suggesting" the existence of a rational connection between the regulation and the asserted government interest and that "[c]ommon sense likewise suggests that there is no [such] connection"

  2. Thornburgh v. Abbott

    490 U.S. 401 (1989)   Cited 3,193 times
    Holding that the factors set forth in Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, apply to the regulation of incoming mail

  3. Procunier v. Martinez

    416 U.S. 396 (1974)   Cited 3,041 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a prisoner interest grounded in the First Amendment "is plainly a 'liberty' interest within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment even though qualified of necessity by the circumstance of imprisonment"

  4. Witherow v. Paff

    52 F.3d 264 (9th Cir. 1995)   Cited 678 times
    Holding that a prisoner "enjoys a First Amendment right to send and receive mail"

  5. Blount v. Rizzi

    400 U.S. 410 (1971)   Cited 189 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "it is for Congress, not this Court, to rewrite the statute."

  6. Beerheide v. Suthers

    286 F.3d 1179 (10th Cir. 2002)   Cited 157 times
    Holding that where evidence of the claimed cost of a measure to the state is "elusive," the conclusion can be drawn that the budgetary impact is de minimis

  7. American Civil Liberties Union v. Reno

    217 F.3d 162 (3d Cir. 2000)   Cited 58 times
    Holding that a plaintiff that establishes a reasonable probability of succeeding on the merits of a First Amendment claim will "almost certainly" suffer irreparable injury, and that "[c]urtailing constitutionally protected speech will not advance the public interest"

  8. Stow v. Grimaldi

    993 F.2d 1002 (1st Cir. 1993)   Cited 36 times
    Holding that a New Hampshire State Prison practice of requiring nonprivileged outgoing mail to be submitted for inspection in unsealed envelopes does not violate prisoners' constitutional rights

  9. Beville v. Ednie

    74 F.3d 210 (10th Cir. 1996)   Cited 14 times

    No. 94-8001. Filed January 22, 1996. Daniel J. Sears, of Daniel J. Sears, P.C., Denver, Colorado, court-appointed counsel for Plaintiff-Appellant. Terry L. Armitage, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Cheyenne, Wyoming (Michael R. Mullikin, of Mullikin, Larson Swift, Jackson, Wyoming, with him on the brief for Defendants-Appellees, in their official capacity), for Defendants-Appellees, in their individual capacity. Paul K. Knight, of Mullikin, Larson Swift, Jackson, Wyoming, for Defendants-Appellees

  10. Johnson v. Smith

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:10-CV-236-RWS (N.D. Ga. Feb. 1, 2011)   Cited 1 times

    PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS 42 U.S.C. § 1983, CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:10-CV-236-RWS. February 1, 2011 ORDER RICHARD STORY, District Judge Plaintiff, pro se, is confined in the Barrow County Detention Center in Winder, Georgia (the "Jail"). He has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this case, which is before the Court for a frivolity review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. I. The Frivolity Review Standard A federal court is required to conduct an initial screening of a prisoner complaint to determine