Rowland v. Jones, 71-1299
| Decision Date | 29 December 1971 |
| Docket Number | 71-1361.,No. 71-1299,71-1299 |
| Citation | 452 F.2d 1005 |
| Parties | Curtis Eugene ROWLAND, Inmate, Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex, Pen Unit, Appellant, v. Ronald B. JONES, Associate Warden, Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex, Pen Unit, Appellee. Curtis Eugene ROWLAND and Charles McClelland, Inmates of the Pen Unit of the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex, Appellees, v. Warden Maurice H. SIGLER, Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex, Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Curtis Rowland and Charles McClelland, pro se.
Con Keating, Lincoln, Neb., on brief for appellees Curtis Rowland and Charles McClelland in No. 71-1361.
Clarence A. H. Meyer, Atty. Gen., and C. C. Sheldon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lincoln, Neb., for Ronald B. Jones and Maurice H. Sigler.
Before MATTHES, Chief Judge, LAY, Circuit Judge, and HUNTER, District Judge.
Two issues are framed in these consolidated appeals : (1) whether state prison authorities may deny access to a newspaper entitled "Muhammad Speaks" and (2) whether a prisoner in the maximum security unit may be denied access to a medallion bearing the picture of Dr. Martin Luther King and the inscription "I have a dream."
The district court ruled that the prison restrictions as to the newspaper constituted prior restraint and were violative of the First Amendment. However, the court held the restrictions imposed as to possession of medals worn around the neck to be within the discretion of prison authorities by reason of their potential danger as a weapon.
We affirm the district court's analysis and result reached on both issues. 327 F.Supp. 821 (D.Neb.1971). In so doing we repeat the court's admonition drawn from Walker v. Blackwell, 411 F.2d 23, 29 (5 Cir. 1969), regarding access to reading materials :
Likewise, we find the district court's ruling as to the medallion worthy of emphasis. The court, in upholding the discretion of prison officials in deciding what jewelry might be dangerous, ruled that there should be no discrimination in the application of this policy. The state argues that access should be denied on the ground that the medal does...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Procunier v. Martinez 8212 1465
...v. Rodgers, 133 U.S.App.D.C. 296, 301—302, 410 F.2d 995, 1000—1001 (1969); Rowland v. Sigler, 327 F.Supp. 821, 827 (Neb.), aff'd, 452 F.2d 1005 (CA8 1971). The State has legitimate and substantial concerns as to security, personal safety, institutional discipline, and prisoner rehabilitatio......
-
Collins v. Schoonfield
...v. Nosser, 438 F.2d 183 (5th Cir. 1972); Gallego v. United States, 276 F.2d 914, 917-918 (9th Cir. 1960). 68 See also Rowland v. Jones, 452 F.2d 1005 (8th Cir. 1971); Sostre v. McGinnis, 442 F.2d 178 (2d Cir. 1971); Walker v. Blackwell, 411 F.2d 23, 28-29 (5th Cir. 1969); Long v. Parker, 39......
-
Nichols v. Nix
...Speaks in order to promote a compelling state interest. Rowland v. Sigler, 327 F.Supp. 821, 827 (D.Neb.), aff'd sub nom. Rowland v. Jones, 452 F.2d 1005 (8th Cir.1971). 30 The lack of disruptions or other adverse consequences arising from the CJCC publications at ISP is not surprising. As w......
-
United States v. Berrigan
...cannot constitutionally be excluded from prisons. See, e. g., Jackson v. Godwin, 400 F.2d 529 (3rd Cir. 1968); Rowland v. Jones, 452 F.2d 1005 (8th Cir. 1971); Fortune Society v. McGinnis, 319 F.Supp. 901, 905 (S.D.N.Y. 1970), and other cases upholding a prisoner's right to send and receive......