In Hebbe v. Pliler -- published July 29, 2010 -- the 9th Circuit ruled that a California prison violated a prisoner’s constitutional right to access to courts when its lockdown prevented the pro se prisoner plaintiff from filing a timely supplemental brief in his criminal appeal, resulting in the appeal’s dismissal. A prisoner has a constitutional right to legal materials when deprivation prevents him from asserting a nonfrivolous legal claim. The prisoner had a legal right to pursue his criminal appeal.
The court further ruled that the prison violated the plaintiff’s constitutional rights when, during a subsequent lockdown, it required the plaintiff to either exercise or use the law library, but not both -- preventing the plaintiff from pursuing a nonfrivolous civil rights suit. A prison cannot require a plaintiff to give up one constitutional right in order to exercise another.
The court also ruled that the Bell/Twombly standard for determining whether a federal complaint states a claim does not prevent courts from interpreting pro se prisoners’ complaints liberally.