Fulford v. Blackburn

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Fulford v. Blackburn

470 So. 2d 515

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedMay 29, 1985

DocketNo. 84 CA 0458

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 470 So. 2d 515 (Fulford v. Blackburn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fulford v. Blackburn, 470 So. 2d 515 (La. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

CARTER, Judge.

Appellant, an inmate at Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola, appeals the trial court’s judgment denying a request for [516]*516mandamus relief. Appellant claims that his constitutional rights were violated when he was denied contact visitation with his family and friends.

After a thorough review and evaluation of the record, we are convinced that the evidence supports the Commissioner’s findings that appellant failed to prove that a constitutional right was violated or that such a constitutional right to contact visitation was conferred by the federal district court’s decision in John E. Ralph v. Hayden Dees, Civil Action Number 71-94, unpublished (United States District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, decided March 13, 1985).

We find that appellant’s constitutional rights have not been violated. The Constitution does not require that detainees be allowed contact visits when responsible, experienced administrators have determined, in their sound discretion, that such visits will jeopardize the security of the facility. See Block v. Rutherford, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 3227, 82 L.Ed.2d 438 (1984); Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 99 S.Ct. 1861, 60 L.Ed.2d 447 (1979). Additionally, lawful incarceration brings about the necessary withdrawal or limitation of many privileges and rights. Pell v. Procurer, 417 U.S. 817, 94 S.Ct. 2800, 41 L.Ed.2d 495 (1974); Price v. Johnston, 334 U.S. 266, 68 S.Ct. 1049, 92 L.Ed. 1356 (1948). Restrictions imposed on the prison’s visitation policy must be reasonably related to a legitimate governmental interest. Armstead v. Phelps, 449 So.2d 1049 (La.App. 1st Cir.1984). Clearly, the policy of restricting inmates confined in closed cell restriction (CCR) from engaging in contact visitation is reasonably related to the legitimate state interest of security. Therefore, we find no error in the trial court’s judgment. LSA-C.C.P. art. 5188; Smith v. AMF Tuboscope, Inc., 442 So.2d 679 (La.App. 1st Cir.1983). Costs of this appeal are assessed against appellant.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CARTER, Judge.

Appellant, an inmate at Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola, appeals the trial court’s judgment denying a request for [516]*516mandamus relief. Appellant claims that his constitutional rights were violated when he was denied contact visitation with his family and friends.

After a thorough review and evaluation of the record, we are convinced that the evidence supports the Commissioner’s findings that appellant failed to prove that a constitutional right was violated or that such a constitutional right to contact visitation was conferred by the federal district court’s decision in John E. Ralph v. Hayden Dees, Civil Action Number 71-94, unpublished (United States District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, decided March 13, 1985).

We find that appellant’s constitutional rights have not been violated. The Constitution does not require that detainees be allowed contact visits when responsible, experienced administrators have determined, in their sound discretion, that such visits will jeopardize the security of the facility. See Block v. Rutherford, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 3227, 82 L.Ed.2d 438 (1984); Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 99 S.Ct. 1861, 60 L.Ed.2d 447 (1979). Additionally, lawful incarceration brings about the necessary withdrawal or limitation of many privileges and rights. Pell v. Procurer, 417 U.S. 817, 94 S.Ct. 2800, 41 L.Ed.2d 495 (1974); Price v. Johnston, 334 U.S. 266, 68 S.Ct. 1049, 92 L.Ed. 1356 (1948). Restrictions imposed on the prison’s visitation policy must be reasonably related to a legitimate governmental interest. Armstead v. Phelps, 449 So.2d 1049 (La.App. 1st Cir.1984). Clearly, the policy of restricting inmates confined in closed cell restriction (CCR) from engaging in contact visitation is reasonably related to the legitimate state interest of security. Therefore, we find no error in the trial court’s judgment. LSA-C.C.P. art. 5188; Smith v. AMF Tuboscope, Inc., 442 So.2d 679 (La.App. 1st Cir.1983). Costs of this appeal are assessed against appellant.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

470 So. 2d 515, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fulford-v-blackburn-lactapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack