Tenth Circuit· 11/13/2003

Hammons v. Saffle

Citations

348 F.3d 1250
2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 23215
2003 WL 22674813

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

recognizing that prison officials have a valid and legitimate interest in maintaining prison security
“[A]ceommodating [prisoner’s] need to access his prayer oils five times per day would likely have heavily burdened prison resources and other inmates’ religious interests.”
remanding with instructions to construe a pro se prisoner complaint in light of RLUIPA even though the complaint alleged only a violation of “his religious freedom rights”
affirming summary judgment that found logical connection between prison regulation that banned inmates’ in-cell prayer oil possession and preventing illegal drug use because inmates could still purchase and possess prayer oil in designated, supervised areas
“the mere diminishment, as opposed to complete denial, of [plaintiffs] spiritual experience is relevant in determining whether the proffered penological interests suffice to justify the infringement”
liberally construing a claim involving religious freedom to include a RLUIPA claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Murphy, Baldock, O'Brien

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.