skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 171339 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: State-Created Liberty Interest in Prisons: What the Court Giveth, the Court Also Taketh Away
Journal: Prison Journal  Volume:76  Issue:3  Dated:(September 1996)  Pages:348-372
Author(s): R V Del Carmen; K Bennett; J D Dailey
Date Published: 1996
Page Count: 25
Sponsoring Agency: NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Sale Source: NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Recognizing that the concept of state-created liberty interest has been part of postconviction jurisprudence for more than 2 decades, this article looks at a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of Sandin v. Conner that has had a significant impact on the concept.
Abstract: Conner was sentenced to 30 years to life for murder, kidnapping, and burglary in Hawaii. While serving time in a maximum-security prison, he was subjected to a strip search and a rectal examination, during which he directed foul language at the correctional officer. Conner was formally charged with disciplinary infractions of high misconduct for physical obstruction of a correctional function and low moderate misconduct for abusive language toward a correctional officer. When he appeared before a prison disciplinary committee, his request to present witnesses was refused and he was found guilty and sentenced for the infractions. Conner later brought suit, alleging deprivation of his rights. The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court where the majority opinion held Hawaii prison regulations and the due process clause of the 14th amendment did not offer Conner a protected liberty interest that would entitle him to procedural due process rights in prison disciplinary proceedings. The interpretation of Sandin v. Conner by Federal appeal courts is discussed, and the authors note future prison inmates will have a more difficult time establishing a case for state-created liberty interests. 48 references, 4 notes, and 2 tables
Main Term(s): US Supreme Court decisions
Index Term(s): Constitutional Rights/Civil Liberties; Corrections; Hawaii; Inmate discipline; Inmate misconduct; Prisoner's rights; Right to Due Process; Rights of the accused
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.