Piccoli v. Board of Trustees and Warden

Decision Date28 October 1949
Docket NumberNo. 732.,732.
Citation87 F. Supp. 672
PartiesPICCOLI v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND WARDEN OF STATE PRISON.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of New Hampshire

Willoughby L. Colby, Concord, N. H., for petitioner.

Gordon M. Tiffany, William S. Green, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.

CONNOR, District Judge.

The petitioner, Gennaro Piccoli, an inmate of the New Hampshire State Prison, complains against the Board of Trustees and Charles B. Clarke, warden of said prison, alleging that he is denied the possession of a set of the Revised Laws of New Hampshire 1942, which he purchased and owns. He prays for an order directed to the board of trustees and said warden that he may be permitted to have and use said books. The petitioner was not present at the hearing, and without evidence the application was submitted upon statement of counsel.

Upon the same allegations, the petitioner has unsuccessfully sought relief in the state court.

In his brief, petitioner claims that his constitutional guaranty of freedom of speech and of the press has been abridged, and that in the litigation in the state courts certain procedural aspects of the case were not followed and that the courts have not given him the right to "defend" his petition.

I am disposed, applying the reasoning in the recent holding in Wade v. Mayo, 334 U.S. 672, 68 S.Ct. 1270, 92 L.Ed. 1647, to entertain the petition. Here as there, the petitioner has failed to invoke the discretionary certiorari powers of the Supreme Court, assuming that such could have been accomplished in the light of the disposition made by the state supreme court. Whatever doubt may exist as to the procedural duty of the petitioner is resolved in his favor.

The action of the board of trustees and the warden in refusing to honor the request of the petitioner is obviously predicated upon the statutory authority set forth in Chapter 464 of the Revised Laws of New Hampshire 1942. The powers of the trustees here material are defined in subsections III and IX of Section 6 of said chapter. Subsection III authorizes the trustees "To establish by-laws for the government of the prison"; subsection IX authorizes the trustees "To provide such books and other instruction as shall be deemed necessary for the convicts." In the same chapter, the duties of the warden are defined. By subsection II of Section 8, the warden is "To have the custody and superintendence of all persons confined in the prison, and of all property belonging thereto"; and subsection III charges the warden with the duty "To obey and enforce all orders, bylaws, and regulations which may be made by the trustees for the management of the prison." Thus by legislative grant the supervision and control of the prison is entrusted to the board of trustees, with specific discretionary powers in reference to "books and other instruction" to be made available.

It is not clear on the record what precise order was made concerning the use of the books of the petitioner or whether it originated with the trustees or with the warden, but it is abundantly plain that the trustees are by the statute charged with...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Nichols v. McGee
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of California
    • January 23, 1959
    ...which reaches such constitutional magnitude as would justify the intervention of this Court (See e. g., Piccoli v. Board of Trustees and Warden of State Prison, D.C., 87 F. Supp. 672). For the reasons, which have been noted above, plaintiff could avail himself nothing by filing his proposed......
  • Pierce v. La Vallee
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • July 31, 1961
    ...dismissed 361 U.S. 6, 80 S.Ct. 90, 4 L.Ed.2d 52; Curtis v. Jacques, D.C.W.D.Mich., 130 F.Supp. 920; Piccoli v. Board of Trustees and Warden of State Prison, D.C.N.H., 87 F. Supp. 672. Whatever may be the view with regard to ordinary problems of prison discipline, however, we think that a ch......
  • Mahaffey v. Day
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court
    • May 2, 1955
    ...3 Pa. D. & C.2d 721 Mahaffey v. Day, Warden No. 72Common Pleas Court of Dauphin County, PennsylvaniaMay 2, 1955 ... Hiatt, 63 F.Supp. 477 (Pa., M. D., 1945); Piccoli v ... Board of Trustees and Warden of State Prison, 87 F.Supp ... 672 ... ...
  • Bailleaux v. Holmes
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Oregon
    • October 2, 1959
    ...355 U.S. 915, 78 S.Ct. 342, 2 L.Ed.2d 274. This principle is equally applicable here. Defendants rely upon Piccoli v. Board of Trustees and Warden, D.C.N.Hamp. 1949, 87 F.Supp. 672. In that case, the Court held that the refusal of prison officials to permit a prisoner to possess a set of Ne......
  • 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
    ...529 (E. D. Pa., 1965); U. S. ex rel. Wakeley v. Pennsylvania, 247 F. Supp. 7 (E. D. Pa., 1965). 13 Piccoli v. State Board of Trustees, 87 F. Supp. 672 (N. H., 1949); Hatfield v. Bailleaux, supra. 14 Piccoli v. State Board of Trustees, supra.15 Grove v. Smyth, supra.16 Barber v. Page, 239 F.......

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