GLENNON HOPPINS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
GOVERNOR GEORGE C. WALLACE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a prison policy providing indigent inmates with two free stamps per week is constitutionally adequate to ensure access to the courts.
An indigent inmate sued, arguing that a prison's policy of providing only two free stamps per week violated his right of access to the courts. The inm…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse 42 U.S.C. § 1985 cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Glennon Hoppins argues on appeal in his 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1983, 1985 suit that his right of access to the courts requires that indigent inmates be permitted to mail unlimited legal correspondence at state expense. The state correctional officers contend their stamp policy permitting each indigent inmate two free 20-cent stamps a week and requiring them to pay for additional postage out of their own funds provides adequate access to the courts. The district court held that two free stamps a week provided Hoppins with adequate access to the courts. We affirm.
In Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 824-25, 97 S.Ct. 1491, 1496-97, 52 L.Ed.2d 72 (1977), the Supreme Court held that it “is indisputable that indigent inmates must be provided at state expense with paper and pen to draft legal documents, with notarial services to authenticate them, and with stamps to mail them.” The Tenth Circuit has interpreted Bounds not to require states “to pay the postage on every item of legal mail each and every prisoner wishes to send.” Twyman v. Crisp, 584 F. 2d 352, 359 (10th Cir.1978).
The Twyman Court determined that the rights of prisoners must be balanced with budgetary constraints. It did not establish the minimum requirements a state must meet to provide indigent prisoners with adequate access to courts but focused instead on whether the individual plaintiff before it had been denied access. 584 F. 2d at 359. Since Twy-man’s litigation about which he sought access was not dismissed and no court sanction was imposed, his delay in mailing due to the prison postage policy was held to have not denied him access to the courts.
The present Alabama prison policy of furnishing inmates with postage for two free letters a week was a direct result of a federal court order entered in Pugh v. Locke, 406 F.Supp. 318, 334 (M.D.Ala.1976), aff'd in part sub nom. Newman v. State of Alabama, 559 F. 2d 283 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 438 U.S. 915, 98 S.Ct. 3144, 57 L.Ed.2d 1160 (1978).
In Pugh, Judge Frank M. Johnson, Jr. originally required five free letters a week, but reduced the number to two free letters a week in a March 5, 1976 unpublished order. As noted by the magistrate and reflected in the record plaintiff Hoppins has an inclination to be very litigious and might well use more stamps if they were made available to him. He has filed numerous pleadings in this case, filed many cases prior to this one in a variety of courts, and he has filed four new 42 U.S. C.A. § 1983 actions since the instant case was commenced. Hoppins presented no evidence, however, that any case was dismissed or that any sanction was imposed by the courts due to the impact of the stamp policy.
The district court focusing on reasonableness, properly upheld the constitutionality of the prison policy based on the undisputed facts, and the guidelines established in Judge Johnson’s Pugh opinions.
The district court did not err in holding that the furnishing of two free stamps a week to indigent prisoners is (1) adequate to allow exercise of the right to access to the courts, and (2) adequate to allow a reasonable inmate to conduct reasonable litigation in any court. The constitutional right to access to the courts entitles indigent prisoners to some free stamps as noted in Bounds but not unlimited free postage as is urged by the plaintiff.
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Adams v. Rodrick James, 784 F.2d 1077 (11th Cir. 1986)…mates, such as the right of free speech, and the right of access to court. See Procunier v. Martinez, 416 U.S. 396, 94 S.Ct. 1800, 40 L.Ed.2d 224 (1974); Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 97 S.Ct. 1491, 52 L.Ed.2d 72 (1977); compare Hoppins v. Wallace, 751 F. 2d 1161 (11th Cir.1985) (reasonableness of limitation on affirmative assistance to litigious inmate). Adams and Piccirillo, however, have constitutional rights independent of any asserted property interest in being law clerks. Prisoners retain constitution…
-
Procup v. Strickland, 760 F.2d 1107 (11th Cir. 1985)…That date is approximately fifteen years away. Procup v. Strickland, supra, 567 F.Supp. at 147. . See supra, note 6. . The supply of writing materials and postage for mailing pleadings to the courts is not unlimited. See, e.g., Hoppins v. Wallace, 751 F. 2d 1161, 1162 (11th Cir.1985). . This Circuit has previously reached analogous holdings requiring district courts to exercise their discretion with respect to every prisoner’s petition for habeas corpus ad testificandum brought under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241(c)(…
-
Dickey Gaines v. Lane, 790 F.2d 1299 (7th Cir. 1986)…ith the media. . In Bach v. Coughlin, 508 F. 2d 303 (7th Cir.1974), this court approved Regulation 823, the precursor of the current Department rule. Id. at 308. Other courts have authorized more stringent provisions. See, e.g., Hoppins v. Wallace, 751 F. 2d 1161 (11th Cir.1985) (furnishing two free stamps a week to indigent prisoners is adequate to allow exercise of the right to access to the courts). . The magistrate erred in not ruling on appellant Dickey Gaines’ request for appointment of counsel. It is…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 (U.S. 1977)
- Newman v. State OF Ala., 559 F.2d 283 (5th Cir. 1977)
- Reading Hosp. & Med. Ctr. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 438 U.S. 915 (U.S. 1978)
- Expeditions Unlimited Aquatic Enters., Inc. v. Smithsonian Inst., 438 U.S. 915 (U.S. 1978)
- Twyman v. Crisp, 584 F.2d 352 (10th Cir. 1978)