Bell v. Wolfish
Significance, Impact, Further Readings
Griffin B. Bell
Regulations imposed on pretrial confinees by the New York City Metropolitan Correctional Center did not impinge upon pretrial detainees' constitutional rights (who, as temporary inmates awaiting trial, had the constitutional right to be regarded as detainees who were presumed innocent).
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Andrew L. Frey
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Phylis Skloot Bamberger
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Potter Stewart, Byron R. White
William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
14 May 1979
Respondents' constitutional right to be treated as unconvicted detainees (despite being incarcerated in a municipal jail) were not violated by New York City Metropolitan Correctional Center regulations and restrictions.
- Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez, 372 U.S. 144 (1963).
- Wolff v. McDonell, 418 U.S. 539 (1974).
- Rhem v. Malcom, 507 F.2d 333, CA2 (1974).
- United States ex rel. Wolfish v. Levi, 439 F.Supp. 114 (1977).
- Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners' Union, 433 U.S. 119 (1977).
- Bellotti v. Baird - Significance, Impact
- Bell v. Ohio - Significance, Ohio Sentences Bell To The Death Penalty, The High Court Strikes Down Ohio's Law
- Bell v. Wolfish - Further Readings
- Bell v. Wolfish - Significance
- Bell v. Wolfish - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias