Printer Friendly
The Free Library
14,497,001 articles and books
Member login
User name  
Password 
 
Join us Forgot password?

Willson v. Buss.


U.S. District Court

MAIL

Willson v. Buss, 370 F.Supp.2d 782 (N.D.Ind. 2005). A former inmate INMATE. One who dwells in a part of another's house, the latter dwelling, at the same time, in the said house. Kitch. 45, b; Com. Dig. Justices of the Peace, B 85; 1 B. & Cr. 578; 8 E. C. L. R. 153; 2 Dowl. & Ry. 743; 8 B. & Cr. 71; 15 E. C. L. R. 154; 2 Man. & Ry. 227; 9 B. & Cr.  sued a prison superintendent, claiming that a rule that denied him receipt of magazines having homosexual content violated his First Amendment rights. The district court entered judgment in favor of the superintendent. The court held that there was a valid, rational connection between the prison's ban on inmate receipt of "blatantly homosexual material" and that the ban furthered a legitimate, penological pe·nol·o·gy also poe·nol·o·gy  
n.
The study, theory, and practice of prison management and criminal rehabilitation.



[Latin poena, penalty (from Greek
 objective of protecting homosexual inmates from injury by the prison population which is traditionally hostile to them. The court noted that the impact of accommodating the inmate's interest in having access to the magazines included the possibility that the materials could get into the hands of other inmates who were not homosexual, and they could be subjected to assaults by homophobic ho·mo·pho·bi·a  
n.
1. Fear of or contempt for lesbians and gay men.

2. Behavior based on such a feeling.



[homo(sexual) + -phobia.
 fellow inmates. The court found that the rule was not void for vagueness void for vagueness adj. referring to a statute defining a crime which is so vague that a reasonable person of at least average intelligence could not determine what elements constitute the crime.  under the First Amendment. (Westville Correctional Facility The Westville Correctional Facility, located in Westville, Indiana, is a state-operated prison for adult males. The facility contains sections of three levels of security. [1] The average daily population in September 2006 was approximately 3,100. , Indiana)
COPYRIGHT 2005 CRS, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2005, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:RULES & REGULATIONS-PRISONER; violation of prisoners' rights
Publication:Corrections Caselaw Quarterly
Article Type:Brief Article
Geographic Code:1U3IN
Date:Aug 1, 2005
Words:163
Previous Article:Rodriguez v. Briley.(RULES & REGULATIONS-PRISONER)(violation of prisoners' rights)(Brief Article)
Next Article:McRoy v. Cook County Dept. of Corrections.(SAFETY AND SECURITY)(violation of prisoners' rights)(Brief Article)
Topics:



Related Articles
Koger v. Snyder.(ACCESS TO COURTS)(Brief Article)
Koger v. Snyder.(searches and seizures lawsuit)(Brief Article)
Koger v. Snyder.(searches and seizures)(Brief Article)
Koger v. Snyder.(TRANSFERS)(Brief Article)
Shakur v. Selsky.(RELIGION)(Brief Article)
Ahmad v. Ehrmann.(RULES & REGULATIONS-PRISONER)(Brief Article)
Lindell v. Frank.(civil rights suit)(Brief Article)
Neal v. Lewis.(violation of constitutional rights)(Brief Article)
Lindell v. Frank.(violation of prisoners' rights)(Brief Article)
Neal v. Lewis.(violation of constitutional rights)(Brief Article)

Terms of use | Copyright © 2009 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters | Submit articles