Wilson v. Blankenship

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the due process clause does not create a liberty interest in being confined in general population rather than administrative segregation
• stating that the “actual injury” requirement for an access to courts claim may be shown if a habeas petition is dismissed or denied
• “[P]risoners have no inherent or independent right of access to a law library or to legal assistance.”
• “Wilson’s forfeiture case is not a type of case that is included under the right of inmates’ access to courts under Lewis . . . .”
• “Wilson has failed to show actual legal injury regarding . . . his criminal conviction, because he was represented by counsel in that matter . . . .”
• “[P]rison officials’ actions that allegedly violate an inmate’s right of access to the courts must have impeded the inmate’s pursuit of a nonfrivolous, post- conviction claim or civil rights action.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).