Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

449 F.2d 338

Docket No. 71-2157.

Young v. Wainwright

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1971-10-05

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“classification of inmates is a matter of prison administration and management with which federal courts are reluctant to interfere except in extreme circumstances”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Green v. McKaskle

Relies on Kimbrough v. Beto · Granville v. Hunt · Krist v. Smith

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1971-10-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently May 1990

13 federal appellate · 1 district ·

150197119801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

George Young, Jr., pro se.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. of Fla., Raymond L. Marky, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Fla., for respondent-appellee.

Before WISDOM, COLEMAN and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Appellant is a Florida state prisoner serving a life sentence for murder. He filed a petition in the court below under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking an injunction to obtain his permanent release from administrative segregation. He alleged that such confinement is unlawful because he has violated no prison regulations. The district court dismissed the petition for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. We affirm.1

¶2

Classification of inmates is a matter of prison administration and management with which federal courts are reluctant to interfere except in extreme circumstances. See Krist v. Smith, 5th Cir. 1971, 439 F.2d 146; Flint v. Wainwright, 5th Cir. 1970, 433 F.2d 961; Granville v. Hunt, 5th Cir. 1969, 411 F.2d 9. There being no extreme circumstances present in this case, the judgment below is affirmed.

¶3

Affirmed.

Notes:

1

It is appropriate to dispose of this pro se case summarily, pursuant to this Court's local Rule 9(c) (2), appellant having failed to file a brief within the time fixed by Rule 31, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Kimbrough v. Beto, Director, 5th Cir. 1969, 412 F.2d 981

/449/f2d/338 · .json · Public domain