Leon G. Schack v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

Fifth Circuit

Leon G. Schack v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

391 F.2d 608

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 10, 1968

Docket25259

StatusPublished

Cited by16 cases

This text of 391 F.2d 608 (Leon G. Schack v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Leon G. Schack v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, 391 F.2d 608 (5th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from a denial of injunctive relief to a Florida State convict.

The appellant is an inmate of the Florida State Prison at Raiford. He petitioned the district court for an injunction to obtain the right to have his mail relating to legal proceedings sent “postage prepaid by certified mail — return receipt requested”. It is undisputed that the prison authorities have agreed to mail the appellant’s correspondence and to give assurance that it has been posted.

The district court held that: “The control of mail to and from prisons is a necessary adjunct to penal administration. McCloskey v. [State of] Maryland, 337 F.2d 72 (4 Cir., 1964). Only if rules or regulations prohibit or unduly hinder a prisoner’s efforts to secure relief from illegal detention or treatment would a federal court be justified in looking into aspects of prison administration relating to the use of the mails. It is clear from Petitioner’s allegations that he is not prohibited nor unduly hindered in seeking relief from alleged wrongs. * * * ”

We find no error in the judgment of the district court. See Labat v. McKeithen, 5 Cir., 1966, 361 F.2d 757; Lee v. Tahash, 8 Cir., 1965, 352 F.2d 970; Adams v. Ellis, 5 Cir., 1952, 197 F.2d 483; Ex parte Wilson, D.C.E.D.S.C., 1964, 235 F.Supp. 988.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from a denial of injunctive relief to a Florida State convict.

The appellant is an inmate of the Florida State Prison at Raiford. He petitioned the district court for an injunction to obtain the right to have his mail relating to legal proceedings sent “postage prepaid by certified mail — return receipt requested”. It is undisputed that the prison authorities have agreed to mail the appellant’s correspondence and to give assurance that it has been posted.

The district court held that: “The control of mail to and from prisons is a necessary adjunct to penal administration. McCloskey v. [State of] Maryland, 337 F.2d 72 (4 Cir., 1964). Only if rules or regulations prohibit or unduly hinder a prisoner’s efforts to secure relief from illegal detention or treatment would a federal court be justified in looking into aspects of prison administration relating to the use of the mails. It is clear from Petitioner’s allegations that he is not prohibited nor unduly hindered in seeking relief from alleged wrongs. * * * ”

We find no error in the judgment of the district court. See Labat v. McKeithen, 5 Cir., 1966, 361 F.2d 757; Lee v. Tahash, 8 Cir., 1965, 352 F.2d 970; Adams v. Ellis, 5 Cir., 1952, 197 F.2d 483; Ex parte Wilson, D.C.E.D.S.C., 1964, 235 F.Supp. 988.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

391 F.2d 608, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leon-g-schack-v-louie-l-wainwright-director-division-of-corrections-ca5-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack