U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

INVOLUNTARY INTERPRISON TRANSFERS OF STATE PRISONERS AFTER MEACHUM V. FANO AND MONTANYE V. HAYMES

NCJ Number
41660
Journal
Ohio State Law Journal Volume: 37 Issue: 4 Dated: (1976) Pages: 845-880
Author(s)
J R BURNSIDE
Date Published
1976
Length
36 pages
Annotation
THIS NOTE DISCUSSES THE SUPREME COURT'S REJECTION OF THE LOWER FEDERAL COURTS' DECISIONS IN MEACHUM V. FANO AND MONTANYE V. HAYMES (1976) AND THE COURT'S OWN ANALYSIS OF THE DUE PROCESS ISSUE PRESENTED BY THEM.
Abstract
THE MEACHUM AND MONTANYE CASES RAISED THE ISSUE OF THE APPLICABILITY OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT'S DUE PROCESS CLAUSE TO THE INTERPRISON TRANSFER OF STATE PRISONERS. ALTHOUGH ITS DECISIONS OF RECENT YEARS HAD GRADUALLY BROADENED THE NATURE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL INTERESTS RETAINED BY CONVICTED PERSONS, THE COURT IN MEACHUM AND MONTANYE DECLARED THAT, ABSENT SOME STATE LAW OR PRACTICE CREATING SUCH RIGHTS, A PRISONER'S PROTECTED LIBERTY INTERESTS DO NOT INCLUDE THE RIGHT TO STAY WHERE HE IS OR THE RIGHT TO NOTICE AND HEARING WHEN INVOLUNTARILY TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER PRISON. THE ARTICLE CONCLUDES THAT THE COURT'S DECISION MAY SIGNAL A RESUMPTION OF THE TRADITIONAL 'HANDS OFF' DOCTRINE--A POLICY OF JUDICIAL ABSTENTION FROM REVIEWING PRISONERS' RIGHTS BASED UPON THE DISCRETION ALLOWED PRISON OFFICIALS IN DEALING WITH INMATES. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)...MSP