Bounds v. Smith
- Decided
- April 27, 1977
- Docket
- 75-915
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 4,812 timesDisapproved (verified)Possible negative treatment: disapproved, overruled in part, abrogated in part, abrogated on other grounds, abrogated in part on other grounds, overruled on other grounds, abrogated, disapproved in part, overruled in part on other grounds, superseded by statute, disapproved on other grounds (1 of 168 verified; none is a verified overruling) · Al-Shabazz v. State
What later courts said
- holding that such assistance requires-only the provision of adequate law libraries or adequate assistance from “persons, trained in the. law” — Fletcher Casey, Jr., on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Samuel A. Lewis, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections (1993)
- holding that such assistance requires only the provision of adequate law libraries or adequate assistance from "persons trained in the law” — Fletcher Casey, Jr., on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Samuel A. Lewis, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections (1993)
- holding that prisoners have a fundamental constitutional right to "a reasonably adequate opportunity to present claimed violations of fundamental constitutional rights to the courts" — Mitchell v. Moore (2001)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Mr. Justice Marshall delivered the opinion of the Court.
The issue in this case is whether States must protect the right of prisoners to access to the courts by providing them with law libraries or alternative sources of legal knowledge. In Younger v. Gilmore, 404 U. S. 15 (1971), we held per curiam that such services are constitutionally mandated. Petitioners, officials of the State of North Carolina, ask us [*818] to overrule that recent case, but for reasons explained below, we decline the invitation and reaffirm our previous decision.
I
Statutes cited
Cite this
Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 (1977)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.