In July 1965, a prisoner housed at Tennessee's State Penitentiary, Nashville, submitted a motion to the United States District Court, Middle District of Tennessee, seeking law books, a typewriter, and release from solitary confinement. The plaintiff alleged that his ongoing solitary confinement, as punishment for helping other inmates prepare habeas petitions, violated his 14th Amendment right to due process; he sought injunctive relief. The Court treated the motion as a petition for habeas corpus.

On January 21, 1966, the district court (Chief Judge William E. Miller) granted the writ, holding that defendants' regulation banning prisoners from giving each other legal assistance was void because it effectively withheld access to federal habeas corpus from illiterate prisoners and conflicted with 28 U.S.C. §2242. The Court ordered defendants to release plaintiff from solitary confinement and restored to ordinary prisoner status. Johnson v. Avery, 252 F.Supp 783 (M.D. Tenn. 1966).

By the time the district court order was entered, plaintiff had been transferred out of the maximum security building into a disciplinary cell block that still had fewer privileges than ordinary prisoners. He was released into regular prison conditions only after he promised to not assist other inmates with their legal issues.

In March 1966, the district court held another hearing on defendants' compliance with its earlier order. The Court reaffirmed its earlier order and the state appealed.

On August 31, 1967, the Court of Appeals (Chief Justice Weick) reversed, holding that defendants' regulation was justified by the state's interest in preserving prison discipline and limiting the practice of law to licensed attorneys. Johnson v. Avery, 383 F.2d 353 (6th Cir. 1967).

On February 24, 1969, the Supreme Court (Justice Fortas) reversed the appellate court, invalidating the regulation as incompatible with inmates' federal habeas corpus rights. Johnson v. Avery, 393 U.S. 483 (1969).

Timothy Shoffner - 05/01/2013


compress summary