Walker v. Pate

Decision Date04 March 1966
Docket NumberNo. 15296,15297.,15296
Citation356 F.2d 502
PartiesPerry E. WALKER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Frank J. PATE, Defendant-Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

Perry E. Walker, pro se.

William G. Clark, Atty. Gen., Chicago, Ill., Richard A. Michael, Philip J. Rock, Asst. Attys. Gen., of counsel, for appellee.

Before DUFFY, KILEY and SWYGERT, Circuit Judges.

DUFFY, Circuit Judge.

We consider here two appeals from the orders of two judges of the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. Each order recited that the complaint therein failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. In each case, plaintiff was given leave to appear pro se, and to appeal in forma pauperis. In each case the printing of an appendix was waived.

In appeal No. 15296, plaintiff seeks to bring a suit for an injunction and for damages. He claims the right to do so under the Federal Civil Rights Acts, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 et seq. and also under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Federal Constitution.

Plaintiff's principal complaint is that prior to entering the Illinois State Penitentiary where he is presently confined, he had become the owner of eight law books, but when committed to the Illinois State Penitentiary, he was not permitted to keep these books. He alleges that other inmates were permitted to keep their personal law books. He also alleges that about November 15, 1962, while in prison, he purchased two law books and a typewriter, but that these were confiscated by agents of Warden Pate.

This complaint also contains a prayer for relief asking that the Warden be restrained and enjoined from discouraging or preventing plaintiff from exercising his right to appeal.

In Appeal No. 15297, plaintiff also seeks an injunction and damages claiming a violation of his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and the Federal Civil Rights Acts. His principal complaint is that the Warden has discriminated against him by preventing his wife and daughter from visiting him while he is under confinement.

A showing was made that prison regulations prohibit inmates from bringing with them certain items of personal property upon being incarcerated in the Illinois State Penitentiary at Statesville, a maximum security prison. Prisoners are not permitted to bring any type of book with them. It is asserted that this proscription is a security measure and that contraband such as hackblades and narcotics could be concealed in books brought in by inmates. However, the regulations permit a prisoner to have in his possession up to six law books, provided that they are purchased through the prison.

As to the request that Warden Pate be restrained from interfering with plaintiff's right to appeal, a showing is made that since 1962, one hundred forty-eight legal documents have been mailed at plaintiff's request to various courts, judges and attorneys.

As to the claim that the Warden would not permit visits by plaintiff's wife and daughter, the regulations encouraged visits by members of the family of an inmate, but visits are not permitted by persons who have a criminal record. It is asserted upon behalf of the Warden, that the plaintiff's wife had been incarcerated in Dwight Penitentiary for Women, pursuant to a felony conviction. There is no objection...

To continue reading

Request your trial
34 cases
  • Roberts v. Pepersack
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • June 29, 1966
    ...right" (United States ex rel. Cleggett v. Pate, 229 F. Supp. 818, 819 (N.D.Ill.1964)); "exceptional circumstances" (Walker v. Pate, 356 F.2d 502, 504 (7th Cir. 1966), United States ex rel. Knight v. Ragen, 337 F.2d 425 (7th Cir. 1964), Austin v. Harris, 226 F.Supp. 304, 307 and 309 (W.D. Mo......
  • Laaman v. Helgemoe
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Hampshire
    • July 1, 1977
    ...See McCray v. Sullivan, 509 F.2d 1332, 1334 (5th Cir.), cert. den., 423 U.S. 859, 96 S.Ct. 114, 46 L.Ed.2d 86 (1975); Walker v. Pate, 356 F.2d 502 (7th Cir.), cert. den., 384 U.S. 966, 86 S.Ct. 1598, 16 L.Ed.2d 678 (1966); Pinkston v. Bensinger, 359 F.Supp. 95 (N.D.Ill.1973); Rowland v. Wol......
  • United States ex rel. Miller v. Twomey
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • May 16, 1973
    ...that one month of his statutory good time was revoked. The district court dismissed his complaint on the authority of Walker v. Pate, 356 F.2d 502 (7th Cir. 1966), cert. denied 384 U.S. 966, 86 S.Ct. 1598, 16 L.Ed.2d 678.11 On appeal, he seeks restitution of this good Counsel for Green, Mil......
  • Morales v. Schmidt
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • January 17, 1973
    ...permit correspondence between plaintiff inmate and another prisoner confined in a different prison was not unreasonable); Walker v. Pate, 356 F.2d 502 (7th Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 966, 86 S.Ct. 1598, 16 L.Ed.2d 678 (prisoner's wife had a criminal record; however, daughter allowed......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Reading Law in Prison
    • United States
    • Prison Journal, The No. 48-1, April 1968
    • April 1, 1968
    ...thatthere are no legal grounds for appeal&dquo;; &dquo;their studying in the law library 11 Bailleaux v. Holmes, supra; Walker v. Pate, 356 F. 2d 502 (7th Cir., People v. Matthews, 46 Misc. 2d 1024, 261 N. Y. S. 2d 654 (1965). 12 Lockhart v. Prasse, 250 F. Supp. 529 (E. D. Pa., 1965); U. S.......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT