Lane v. Swain, No. 17-55578 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseThe Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of three petitions for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. 2241 challenging the revocation of good time credits. Petitioner was disciplined under Bureau of Prisons Prohibited Acts Code 203, which prohibits threatening another with bodily harm or any other offense. The panel held that when read reasonably in the context of the prison setting, and limiting the phrase "any other offense" to criminal offenses or violations of BOP rules, Code 203 is sufficiently narrow and clear to protect inmates' First Amendment rights.
Court Description: Habeas Corpus. The panel affirmed the district court’s denial of three 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus petitions in which Mark Alan Lane challenged the revocation of good time credits. Lane was accused by the Bureau of Prisons of sending threatening letters from prison and was disciplined under BOP Prohibited Acts Code 203, which prohibits “[t]hreatening another with bodily harm or any other offense.” He contended that the term “another” and the phrase “any other offense” are so broad and vague as to violate his rights under the First Amendment. The panel held that when read reasonably in the context of the prison setting, and limiting the phrase “any other offense” to criminal offenses or violations of BOP rules, Code 203 is sufficiently narrow and clear to protect inmates’ First Amendment rights.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.