CJ471_study_guide2-1 - Know the Key Terms for all of the...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Know the Key Terms for all of the textbook pages/chapters covered since the last exam Ex parte Hull—early decision re: prison review of prisoners’ legal filings o Facts: Someone read prison filings and decided if they would be officially filed mailed to courts? o Supreme Court said NO. Prison officials cannot handle prison communications with the court o RIGHT TO ACCESS OF THE COURTS Potentially no rights without this because they cannot be enforced Not articulated in the Constitution Supreme Court says it is covered in DUE PROCESS o Provides litigation a foundation for prisoner rights, along with Cooper v. Pate Cooper v. Pate o Prisoners are included in those who can file Section 1983 o Provides litigation a foundation for prisoner rights, along with Ex Parte Hull Johnson v. Avery—pro-prisoner ruling but look closely at how the holding/rule is phrase o Involved jailhouse lawyers (aka writ writer) o Ruled that if you don’t give prisoners assistance, you must allow jailhouse lawyers to help. Warren Court Era o (1953-1969, 65-69) o Most aimed at police, not corrections o Included Mapp v. Ohio Miranda Rights o Included at Johnson vs. Avery, Cooper v. Pate Bounds v. Smith—library if other legal assistance not provided o Occurred during the 1970’s Court composition has changed o 5 of them are gone appointed by Republican Presidents o Ruled that prisons must provide law library or to provide legal assistance o Effect Most have chosen law libraries Lower courts have helped flesh out what is to be included in the law libraries
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Prison officials can be restrictive on using assistance Limited utility Lewis v. Casey—know the details of the claim and the district court decision—as well as Justice Scalia’s majority opinion view on standing and on the limited nature of the right; Thomas critique lower court judges going too far o Facts: Couldn’t speak English and wanted access to the court wanted assistance o Lower court tried to force Arizona o Lower courts found to have overstepped their boundaries o Scalia Likes to use standing To interpret and use standing to keep people from filing lawsuits Jurisdictional trick Doesn’t really believe in access to the of the courts o Thomas Much more open and honest One right Thomas recognizes for incarcerated individuals: right to access of the court Right not to be arbitrarily prevention of putting mail in the mail slot o Only mail slot, not pen and paper, etc. Hollow right Shaw v. Murphy—whose right at issue? o Procunier v. Martinez: what is the early, limited right regarding mail? Turner v. Safley: 4-part test [Which rights claims have the justices evaluated through the Turner test since 1987 and which rights claims have been evaluated with other tests? o
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 15

CJ471_study_guide2-1 - Know the Key Terms for all of the...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online