Web Results

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_v._Wolfish

Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (1979), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court found that it was not a violation of the Fourth Amendment to perform intrusive body searches on pre-trial detainees. Contents. [hide]. 1 Significance; 2 See also; 3 Footnotes; 4 References. Significance[edit]. This case arose as a ...

supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/441/520/case.html

U.S. Supreme Court. Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (1979). Bell v. Wolfish. No. 77- 1829. Argued January 16, 1979. Decided May 14, 1979. 441 U.S. 520. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS. FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. Syllabus. Respondent inmates brought this class action in Federal District ...

caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/441/520.html

[ Footnote * ] Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance were filed by Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III, and Joel Berger for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., and by Ralph I. Knowles, Jr., and Alvin J. Bronstein for the National Prison Project of the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation. [ 441 U.S. 520 ...

caselaw.findlaw.com/us-3rd-circuit/1751284.html

Oct 20, 2016 ... Case opinion for US 3rd Circuit GUILLERMO RUIZ v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Read the Court's full decision on FindLaw.

www.law.ufl.edu/_pdf/academics/centers/cgr/11th_conference/Tim_Maloney_Rights_of_Detainees.pdf

3 other in preparation of habeas corpus petitions unless the state provided a reasonable alternative of petitions for post conviction relief. 393 U.S. 483 (1969). Bounds v. Smith expanded prisoner in an unprecedented manner. In Bounds, the Supreme. Court held that the states should not only refrain from obstructing prisoner ...

solitarywatch.com/resources/u-s-supreme-court-cases

134 U.S. 160, 171 (1890). 3. In re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 436 (1890). a. Holds that 8th Amendment is incorporated against the states, and that electrocution does not violate 8th Amendment. 4. McElvaine v. Brush, 142 U.S. 155 (1891). a. Court rejects a direct 8th Amendment challenge to electrocution and solitary confinement by ...

www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0735648X.1987.9721334

Jan 10, 2012 ... Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520. 60 L. Ed. 2d 447, S. Ct. 1861 (1979) was of major importance in prisoner's rights litigation and signalled a potential return to ... 3. the package receipt restriction was not a violation of due process. 4. room searches of pre-trial detainees were not a violation of the right of privacy.

www.oyez.org/cases/1978/77-1829

Jan 16, 1979 ... Bell v. Wolfish ... Lower court. United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ... Petitioners claimed that double-bunking, restrictions on reading materials that inmates were allowed to receive, and required cavity searches and shakedowns amounted to punishment before conviction.

www.kentlaw.iit.edu/sites/ck/files/public/academics/jd/7cr/v4-1/elkins.pdf

between the commitment and trial, a prisoner ought to be used with. *. J.D. candidate, May 2009, Chicago-Kent College of Law, Illinois Institute of. Technology; B.A., May 2006, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. 1. U.S. CONST. amend. VIII. 2. Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651, 671 n.40 (1977). 3. Bell v. Wolfish, 441 ...