Wainwright v. Coonts

Decision Date25 March 1969
Docket NumberNo. 26129.,26129.
Citation409 F.2d 1337
PartiesLouie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, et al., Appellants, v. Willis G. COONTS, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Fla., for appellants.

Richard B. Austin, Jacksonville, Fla., for appellee.

Before THORNBERRY and DYER, Circuit Judges, and KEADY, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner is an inmate in a Florida prison. He was transferred to the maximum security section of the Raiford State Penitentiary and placed in solitary confinement for violation of a prison regulation prohibiting prisoners from assisting other inmates in the preparation of writs and legal papers. Petitioner filed a petition in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida in which he attacked the validity of the prison regulation and sought an order requiring law books to be furnished to the prisoners. Pursuant to petitioner's request for release from solitary confinement, the District Court treated this petition as a petition for habeas corpus. After a hearing, the District Court ordered that petitioner be released from solitary confinement and declared the prison regulation void because it barred prisoners from access to the courts.

The State appeals, arguing that the regulation is justified by the interest of the State in preserving prison discipline and in policing the unauthorized practice of law. This position is plainly foreclosed by the recent decision of the United States Supreme Court in Johnson v. Avery, Feb. 24, 1969, 393 U.S. 483, 89 S.Ct. 747, 21 L.Ed.2d 718, where the Court held that "unless and until the State provides some reasonable alternative to assist inmates in the preparation of petitions for post-conviction relief, it may not validly enforce a regulation * * * barring inmates from furnishing such assistance to other prisoners." 393 U.S. at 490, 89 S.Ct. at 751.

Florida has not demonstrated that it provides an available alternative to the assistance provided by other inmates. The State, however, attempts to distinguish Johnson v. Avery, supra, on the ground that the Tennessee prison regulation at issue there placed an absolute ban on prisoner assistance, whereas the Florida regulation before us allows such assistance to be provided to illiterate inmates. Concededly, illiterates are likely to be among those most in need of help, and the exception...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Souza v. Travisono
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Rhode Island
    • 18 Diciembre 1973
    ...v. Florida, 373 U.S. 379 83 S.Ct. 1322, 10 L.Ed.2d 428 (1963)." 393 U.S. at 490, n. 11, 89 S.Ct. at 751. See also Wainwright v. Coonts, 409 F.2d 1337 (5th Cir. 1969). Focusing on the defendants' testimony it fails far short of supporting their position as to prison security. Not even a scin......
  • Dreyer v. Jalet
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • 18 Septiembre 1972
    ...in carrying that burden. 453 F.2d at 664. See Beard v. Alabama Board of Corrections, 413 F.2d 455 (5th Cir. 1969); Wainwright v. Coonts, 409 F.2d 1337 (5th Cir. 1969). Similarly, inmates incarcerated in a state penal institution have a basic right, subject to reasonable regulations, to have......
  • Cross v. Powers
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Wisconsin
    • 23 Junio 1971
    ...rights in the context of state and federal habeas corpus petitions. Johnson v. Avery, supra; Ex parte Hull, supra; Wainwright v. Coonts, 409 F.2d 1337 (5th Cir. 1969); Arey v. Peyton, 378 F.2d 930 (4th Cir. 1967); DeWitt v. Pail, 366 F.2d 682, 685 (9th Cir. 1966); Spires v. Bottorff, 317 F.......
  • Hadix v. Johnson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Michigan
    • 1 Julio 1988
    ...e.g. Adams v. Carlson, 488 F.2d 619 (7th Cir.1973); United States v. Simpson, 141 U.S.App.D.C. 8, 436 F.2d 162 (1970); Wainwright v. Coonts, 409 F.2d 1337 (5th Cir.1969) We therefore conclude that the right of court access requires that the State provide some source of assistance for litera......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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