Significant Cases in Corrections

by Craig Hemmens, Barbara Belbot, Katherine Bennett

Overview

Easily accessible to undergraduates, Significant Cases in Corrections, Second Edition, offers a clear, comprehensive introduction to corrections. Rather than providing complete opinions, which may overwhelm students, the authors present case briefs, along with analyses, explanations, and short excerpts.

In addition to the case summaries, the book includes lists of all of the cases it covers, both in alphabetical order and grouped by topic; a short introduction to each topic; and an index.


CRIMINAL JUSTICE CASE BRIEFS SERIES

Significant Cases in Criminal Procedure, Second Edition
Craig Hemmens, Alan Thompson, and Lisa S. Nored
(978-0-19-995791-0)

Significant Cases in Corrections, Second Edition
Craig Hemmens, Barbara Belbot, and Katherine Bennett
(978-0-19-994858-1)

Significant Cases in Juvenile Justice, Second Edition
Craig Hemmens, Benjamin Steiner, and David Mueller
(978-0-19-995841-2)

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9780199948581
Publisher:	Oxford University Press
Publication date:	01/24/2013
Series:	Criminal Justice Case Briefs
Edition description:	New Edition
Pages:	240
Product dimensions:	7.90(w) x 9.90(h) x 0.70(d)

Table of Contents

AcknowledgmentsPrefaceTable of CasesCase HoldingsIntroductionChapter One: SentencingiTownsend v. Burke,/i 334 U.S. 736 (1948)iTrop v. Dulles,/i 356 U.S. 86 (1958)iNorth Carolina v. Pearce,/i 95 U.S. 711 (1969)iWilliams v. Illinois,/i 399 U.S. 235 (1970)iUnited States v. Grayson,/i 438 U.S. 41 (1978)iRoberts v. United States,/i 445 U.S. 552 (1980)iBlack v. Romano,/i 471 U.S. 606 (1985)iMistretta v. United States,/i 488 U.S. 361 (1989)iHarmelin v. Michigan,/i 501 U.S. 957 (1991)iReno v. Koray,/i 515 U.S. 50 (1995)iKoon v. United States,/i 518 U.S. 81 (1996)iNeal v. United States,/i 516 U.S. 284 (1996)iUnited States v. Watts,/i 519 U.S. 148 (1997)iUnited States v. Bajakajian,/i 524 U.S. 321 (1998)iApprendi v. New Jersey,/i 530 U.S. 466 (2000)iSeling v. Young,/i 531 U.S. 250 (2001)iAlabama v. Shelton,/i 535 U.S. 654 (2002)iEwing v. California,/i 528 U.S. 11 (2003)iBlakely v. Washington,/i 542 U.S. 296 (2004)iUnited States v. Booker,/i 543 U.S. 220 (2005)iKimbrough v. United States,/i 552 U.S. 85 (2007)iGall v. United States,/i 552 U.S. 38 (2007)iCalifornia v. Cunningham,/i 549 U.S. 270 (2007)iGraham v. Florida,/i 560 U.S. — (2010)Chapter Two: The Death PenaltyiFurman v. Georgia,/i 408 U.S. 238 (1972)iGregg v. Georgia,/i 428 U.S. 153 (1976)iWoodson v. North Carolina,/i 428 U.S. 280 (1976)iCoker v. Georgia,/i 433 U.S. 584 (1977)iLockett v. Ohio,/i 438 U.S. 98 (1978)iGodfrey v. Georgia,/i 446 U.S. 420 (1980)iPulley v. Harris,/i 465 U.S. 37 (1984)iSpaziano v. Florida,/i 468 U.S. 447 (1984)iLockhart v. Mccree,/i 476 U.S. 162 (1986)iFord v. Wainwright,/i 477 U.S. 399 (1986)iTison v. Arizona,/i 481 U.S. 137 (1987)iMcCleskey v. Kemp,/i 481 U.S. 279 (1987)iMaynard v. Cartwright,/i 486 U.S. 356 (1988)iStanford v. Kentucky,/i 492 U.S. 361 (1989)iPayne v. Tennessee,/i 501 U.S. 808 (1991)iHerrera v. Collins,/i 506 U.S. 390 (1993)iSimmons v. South Carolina,/i 512 U.S. 154 (1994)iJones v. United States,/i 527 U.S. 373 (1999)iAtkins v. Virginia,/i 536 U.S. 304 (2002)iRing v. Arizona,/i 536 U.S. 584 (2002)iRoper v. Simmons,/i 543 U.S. 551 (2005)iRompilla v. Beard,/i 545 U.S. 374 (2005)iBaze v. Rees,/i 553 U.S. 35 (2008)iKennedy v. Louisiana,/i 554 U.S. 407 (2008)Chapter Three: Access to CourtsiEx parte Hull,/i 312 U.S. 546 (1941)iGriffin v. Illinois,/i 351 U.S. 12 (1956)iBurns v. Ohio,/i 60 U.S. 252 (1959)iSmith v. Bennett,/i 365 U.S. 708 (1961)iJohnson v. Avery,/i 393 U.S. 483 (1969)iBounds v. Smith,/i 430 U.S. 817 (1977)iMurray v. Giarratano,/i 492 U.S. 1 (1989)iLewis v. Casey,/i 518 U.S. 343 (1996)iShaw v. Murphy,/i 532 U.S. 223 (2001)Chapter Four: Access to the Press, the Outside World, and the MailProcunier v. Martinez, 416 U.S. 396 (1974)iPell v. Procunier,/i 417 U.S. 817 (1974)iJones v. North Carolina Prisoners' Labor Union, Inc.,/i 433 U.S. 119 (1977)iHouchins v. KQED, Inc.,/i 438 U.S. 1 (1978)iBlock v. Rutherford,/i 468 U.S. 576 (1984)iTurner v. Safley,/i 482 U.S. 78 (1987)iThornburgh v. Abbott,/i 490 U.S. 401 (1989)Chapter Five: Conditions of ConfinementiLee v. Washington,/i 390 U.S. 333 (1968)iCruz v. Beto,/i 405 U.S. 319 (1972)iBell v. Wolfish,/i 441 U.S. 520 (1979)iRhodes v. Chapman,/i 452 U.S. 337 (1981)iO'Lone v. Estate of Shabazz,/i 482 U.S. 342 (1987)iDeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services,/i 489 U.S. 189 (1989)iWilson v. Seiter,/i 501 U.S. 294 (1991)iRufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail,/i 502 U.S. 367 (1992)iHelling v. McKinney,/i 509 U.S. 25 (1993)iFarmer v. Brennan,/i 511 U.S. 825 (1994)iJohnson v. California,/i 543 U.S. 499 (2005)iCutter et al. v. Wilkinson,/i 544 U.S. 709 (2005)iU.S. v. Georgia,/i 546 U.S. 151 (2006)Chapter Six: Medical CareiEstelle v. Gamble,/i 429 U. S. 97 (1976)iWest v. Atkins,/i 487 U. S. 42 (1988)iWashington v. Harper,/i 494 U. S. 210 (1990)iPennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Yeskey,/i 524 U. S. 206 (1998)iMcKune v. Lile,/i 536 U.S. 24 (2002)Chapter Seven: Inmate Searches and Use of ForceiHudson v. Palmer,/i 468 U.S. 517 (1984)iWhitley v. Albers,/i 475 U.S. 312 (1986)iHudson v. McMillian,/i 303 U.S. 1 (1992)Chapter Eight: Due Process and Discipline, Administrative Segregation, and TransferiWolff v. McDonnell,/i 418 U.S. 539 (1974)iBaxter v. Palmigiano,/i 425 U.S. 308 (1976)iHutto v. Finney,/i 437 U.S. 638 (1978)iHewitt v. Helms,/i 459 U.S. 460 (1983)iHughes v. Rowe,/i 449 U.S. 5 (1980)iSuperintendent Walpole v. Hill,/i 472 U.S. 445 (1985)iPonte v. Real,/i 471 U.S. 491 (1985)iMeachum v. Fano,/i 427 U.S. 215 (1976)iMontanye v. Hughes,/i 427 U.S. 236 (1976)iVitek v. Jones,/i 445 U.S. 480 (1980)iSandin v. Connor,/i 515 U.S. 472 (1995)iWilkinson v. Austin,/i 545 U.S. 209 (2005)Chapter Nine: Liability And DamagesiParratt v. Taylor,/i 451 U.S. 527 (1981)iHarlow v. Fitzgerald,/i 457 U.S. 800 (1982)iSmith v. Wade,/i 461 U.S. 30 (1983)iCleavinger v. Saxner,/i 474 U.S. 193 (1985)iDaniels v. Williams,/i 474 U.S. 327 (1986)iRichardson v. McKnight,/i 521 U.S. 399 (1997)iAli v. Federal Bureau of Prison et al.,/i 552 U.S. 214 (2008)iMinneci v. Pollard,/i 132 S.Ct. 617 (2012)Chapter Ten: Habeas Corpus and the Prison Litigation Reform ActiPrice v. Johnston,/i 334 U.S. 266 (1948)iRose v. Lundy,/i 455 U.S. 509 (1982)iMcCleskey v. Zant,/i 499 U.S. 467 (1991)iReed v. Farley,/i 512 U.S. 339 (1994)iFelker v. Turpin,/i 518 U.S. 651 (1996)iMartin v. Hadix,/i 527 U.S. 343 (1999)iMiller v. French,/i 530 U.S. 327 (2000)iBooth v. Churner,/i 532 U.S. 731 (2001)iArtuz v. Bennett,/i 531 U.S. 4 (2000)iDuncan v. Walker,/i 533 U.S. 167 (2001)iPorter v. Nussle,/i 534 U.S. 516 (2002)iBoumedienne v. Bush,/i 553 U.S. 723 (2008)iBrown v. Plata,/i 131 S.Ct. 1910, 563 U.S. — (2011)Chapter Eleven: ParoleiMorrissey v. Brewer,/i 408 U.S. 471 (1972)iMoody v. Daggett,/i 429 U.S. 78 (1976)iGreenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex,/i 442 U.S. 1 (1979)iMartinez v. California,/i 444 U.S. 277 (1980)iConnecticut Board of Pardons v. Dumschat,/i 452 U.S. 458 (1981)iJago v. Van Curen,/i 454 U.S. 14 (1981)iWeaver v. Graham,/i 450 U.S. 24 (1981)iBoard of Pardons v. Allen,/i 482 U.S. 369 (1986)iCalifornia Department of Corrections v. Morales,/i 514 U.S. 499 (1995)iLynce v. Mathis,/i 519 U.S. 433 (1997)iYoung v. Harper,/i 520 U.S. 143 (1997)iPennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole v. Scott,/i 524 U.S. 357 (1998)iOhio Adult Parole Authority v. Woodard,/i 523 U.S. 272 (1998)iGarner v. Jones,/i 529 U.S. 244 (2000)iSamson v. California,/i 547 U.S. 843 (2006)Chapter Twelve: ProbationiEx Parte United States (Killits),/i 242 U.S. 27 (1916)iMempa v. Rhay,/i 389 U.S. 128 (1967)iGagnon v. Scarpelli,/i 411 U.S. 778 (1973)iCabell v. Chavez-Salido,/i 454 U.S. 432 (1981)iBearden v. Georgia,/i 461 U.S. 660 (1983)iMinnesota v. Murphy,/i 465 U.S. 420 (1984)iBlack v. Romano,/i 471 U.S. 606 (1985)iGriffin v. Wisconsin,/i 483 U.S. 868 (1987)iForrester v. White,/i 484 U.S. 219 (1988)iAlden v. Maine,/i 527 U.S. 706 (1999)Glossary of Key TermsIndex

Editorial Reviews

"A great supplemental text. It's to-the-point and easy to understand. The inclusion of 'first-person' case language gives students a better understanding of each case. I have not seen a student-friendly approach of this kind in a legalistic text."
—Jessie L. Krienert, Illinois State University

"Simple and easy to read. The book introduces students to the legal arena without overwhelming legalese. Very student-friendly."
—Tom Powell, Paradise Valley Community College

"This book offers a unique approach. The authors' writing style is excellent, and the work is clearly well organized."
—Michael Geary, Albertus Magnus College

From the Publisher