Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

In Re Harrell

California Supreme Court

Decided June 18, 1970No. Docket Nos. Crim. 13222, 13383, 13855, 13888PublishedCited by 87 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SULLIVAN, J.

Hulen T. Harrell, Melvin Carlos McKinney and Howard Neu Ingram, Jr., are prison inmates in the lawful custody of the Department of Corrections—Harrell .and Ingram at San Quentin Prison and McKinney at Folsom Prison. By separate petitions for a writ of habeas corpus, prepared in propria persona, they complain of limitations placed by prison regulations and authorities upon their rights to give and receive mutual legal assistance, to have personal access to the courts, and to receive and have books and other printed materials. “The writ of habeas corpus may be sought by one…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Johnson v. AverySupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Ex Parte HullSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  3. In Re SwainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Gilmore v. LynchDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1970
  5. In re BerryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by87 opinions

  1. Pell v. ProcunierSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. In Re William M.California Supreme Court · 1970
  3. People v. KaaneheCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  4. In Re OlsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
  5. People v. WarrenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988

82 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API