Legal Opinion

In Re Van Geldern

California Supreme Court

Decided October 18, 1971No. Docket Nos. Crim. 14871, 14939PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PETERS, J.

Petitioners Nathan E. Eli, an inmate at San Quentin Prison under sentence of death, and John van Geldern, an inmate at Folsom State Prison, seek habeas corpus to challenge a Department of Corrections rule requiring inmate-authors to relinquish a portion of their profits and royalties from published writings.

That rule, Director of the Department of Corrections rule 2505, provides: “To defray handling costs, a percentage established by the Director will be deducted from the payment received for each manuscript and deposited in the Inmate Welfare Fund. The percentage will be the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In Re HarrellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  2. In Re FergusonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Davis v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  4. In Re ChessmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  5. In Re Van GeldernCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Pell v. ProcunierSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Payne v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Gomez v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
  4. In Re CummingsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  5. In Re StanleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976

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

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

Powered by the Exa API